Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • amz84uk
    • By amz84uk 7th Jul 17, 10:30 PM
    • 224Posts
    • 40Thanks
    amz84uk
    Offered a role but subsequently withdrawn
    • #1
    • 7th Jul 17, 10:30 PM
    Offered a role but subsequently withdrawn 7th Jul 17 at 10:30 PM
    I have been on a 12 month secondment in my current team, and was offered a permanent role following a formal interview. After 3 days of contemplating whether it is the right choice (primarily as the salary offered was much lower than advertised), I decided to accept it.

    However, my manager (who is also the recruiting manager) said that I am not the right candidate for the role and retracted the offer. with the intention of finding someone else now.

    Can he do this legally? What options do I have to pursue this, as I now risk losing my job. What should I ask Employee Relations / HR when raising a grievance about this?

    Many thanks in advance for all support and advice offered.
Page 1
    • Fireflyaway
    • By Fireflyaway 7th Jul 17, 10:52 PM
    • 1,034 Posts
    • 1,039 Thanks
    Fireflyaway
    • #2
    • 7th Jul 17, 10:52 PM
    • #2
    • 7th Jul 17, 10:52 PM
    Yes it is legal but not very professional. I had similar happen to me several times. One minute there was a secondment opportunity, then not, then it was delayed, then withdrawn etc.
    So do you mean the secondment could have been made permanent or is this 2 different jobs? If the secondment ends don't you just return to your substantive post? Why would you not have a job? Maybe I'm not understanding your situation.
    • amz84uk
    • By amz84uk 7th Jul 17, 11:28 PM
    • 224 Posts
    • 40 Thanks
    amz84uk
    • #3
    • 7th Jul 17, 11:28 PM
    • #3
    • 7th Jul 17, 11:28 PM
    Hi Fireflyaway. Thanks for the quick response.

    It is a secondment role which was expected to be converted into a permanent position. It was offered and retracted by the manager.

    You're right that I will go into my old substantive role, but that role will soon be made redundant, hence a lot was banking on me securing the role (but the manager offered a significantly lower salary).
    • sangie595
    • By sangie595 8th Jul 17, 7:54 AM
    • 3,359 Posts
    • 5,583 Thanks
    sangie595
    • #4
    • 8th Jul 17, 7:54 AM
    • #4
    • 8th Jul 17, 7:54 AM
    The fact that the salary was less than advertised suggests that the manager didn't think you were the right fit for the post all along. The fact that you spent three days deciding whether to take it (and knew that you were soon going to be made redundant, so needed the job) also gave the manager time to get cold feet about offering the job to someone they didn't feel fitted the role.

    I'm not seeing what is unprofessional about this - you wanted time to think it over, the manager used that time to do the same thing. TBH, it rather sounds like the offer may have been made because you are facing redundancy and they wanted to give you a shot at it rather than simply let you go. If that is the case then it might be a good thing for you - had you not coped with the role then you would quite possibly have been dismissed - and without redundancy but on grounds of capability.

    But really, what are you going to submit a grievance about? That you needed three days to think about taking the job, but the manager isn't allowed to do the same thing? I doubt that will work out. And besides which, if you now force the manager to accept you into the role, against their wishes, then you are simply asking for trouble. If the manager second guessed themselves about your suitability for the role, you are simply painting a target on your back for them to prove their point!
    • gettingtheresometime
    • By gettingtheresometime 8th Jul 17, 11:41 AM
    • 2,488 Posts
    • 5,446 Thanks
    gettingtheresometime
    • #5
    • 8th Jul 17, 11:41 AM
    • #5
    • 8th Jul 17, 11:41 AM
    The fact that the salary was less than advertised suggests that the manager didn't think you were the right fit for the post all along. The fact that you spent three days deciding whether to take it (and knew that you were soon going to be made redundant, so needed the job) also gave the manager time to get cold feet about offering the job to someone they didn't feel fitted the role.

    I'm not seeing what is unprofessional about this - you wanted time to think it over, the manager used that time to do the same thing. TBH, it rather sounds like the offer may have been made because you are facing redundancy and they wanted to give you a shot at it rather than simply let you go. If that is the case then it might be a good thing for you - had you not coped with the role then you would quite possibly have been dismissed - and without redundancy but on grounds of capability.

    But really, what are you going to submit a grievance about? That you needed three days to think about taking the job, but the manager isn't allowed to do the same thing? I doubt that will work out. And besides which, if you now force the manager to accept you into the role, against their wishes, then you are simply asking for trouble. If the manager second guessed themselves about your suitability for the role, you are simply painting a target on your back for them to prove their point!
    Originally posted by sangie595
    That was my initial thought - you took 3 days to say yes to a job you were offered - wgphich would suggest to me as an employer you weren't going to be fully committed to the role
    Lloyds OD / Natwest OD / PO CC / Wescott cleared thanks to the 1 debt v 100 day challenge


    Next on the list - the Argos Card!
    • amz84uk
    • By amz84uk 8th Jul 17, 6:41 PM
    • 224 Posts
    • 40 Thanks
    amz84uk
    • #6
    • 8th Jul 17, 6:41 PM
    • #6
    • 8th Jul 17, 6:41 PM
    Thank you for the responses.

    The fact that the salary was less than advertised suggests that the manager didn't think you were the right fit for the post all along. The fact that you spent three days deciding whether to take it (and knew that you were soon going to be made redundant, so needed the job) also gave the manager time to get cold feet about offering the job to someone they didn't feel fitted the role.
    Originally posted by sangie595
    This is an internal move and the recruiting manager knew me prior to making me an informal offer of salary, but when it came to the formal offer it was reduced significantly. This resulted in me taking 3 days to decide, aswell as explore alternative options. I'm amazed how the HR team can allow a manager to make an offer and 3 days later allow this to be retracted.


    I'm not seeing what is unprofessional about this - you wanted time to think it over, the manager used that time to do the same thing. TBH, it rather sounds like the offer may have been made because you are facing redundancy and they wanted to give you a shot at it rather than simply let you go. If that is the case then it might be a good thing for you - had you not coped with the role then you would quite possibly have been dismissed - and without redundancy but on grounds of capability.
    Totally agree with you - it's a blessing in disguise.

    But really, what are you going to submit a grievance about? That you needed three days to think about taking the job, but the manager isn't allowed to do the same thing? I doubt that will work out. And besides which, if you now force the manager to accept you into the role, against their wishes, then you are simply asking for trouble. If the manager second guessed themselves about your suitability for the role, you are simply painting a target on your back for them to prove their point!
    Grievance on the basis that I was misled me all along, and that the manager made an offer and retracted it when I accepted; why did the manager not retract it PRIOR to me accepting it?! After this, I would not wish to work for that manager, so that is not an option.
    • jbond
    • By jbond 10th Jul 17, 10:26 AM
    • 62 Posts
    • 18 Thanks
    jbond
    • #7
    • 10th Jul 17, 10:26 AM
    • #7
    • 10th Jul 17, 10:26 AM
    The fact that the salary was less than advertised suggests that the manager didn't think you were the right fit for the post all along.

    I'm thinking "load of b*****ks" on this one, because the formal offer (lower salary) was made, then the OP took 3 days mainly due to this factor, so I think there's another reason why the salary was lowered?

    But the OP was already doing the job for however long, so would have known whether they were any good at it or not?

    I'd want to know why the salary was reduced.
    • sangie595
    • By sangie595 10th Jul 17, 11:41 AM
    • 3,359 Posts
    • 5,583 Thanks
    sangie595
    • #8
    • 10th Jul 17, 11:41 AM
    • #8
    • 10th Jul 17, 11:41 AM
    The fact that the salary was less than advertised suggests that the manager didn't think you were the right fit for the post all along.

    I'm thinking "load of b*****ks" on this one, because the formal offer (lower salary) was made, then the OP took 3 days mainly due to this factor, so I think there's another reason why the salary was lowered?

    But the OP was already doing the job for however long, so would have known whether they were any good at it or not?

    I'd want to know why the salary was reduced.
    Originally posted by jbond
    Actually, there is nothing that says that the OP was already doing the job - they are seconded to the team, but that doesn't mean that the same thing as doing the job. But yes, quite - they did know the OP, and that means they clearly didn't think they were worth the higher salary, or that would have been what was offered. But they could, of course, have simply decided to not make their offer at all. If they were somewhat dubious about the position though, the fact that the OP was too, albeit for a different reason, means they have them time to reconsider.

    And you may want to know why the salary was reduced. But that doesn't mean the employer had to explain.
    • amz84uk
    • By amz84uk 11th Jul 17, 1:47 PM
    • 224 Posts
    • 40 Thanks
    amz84uk
    • #9
    • 11th Jul 17, 1:47 PM
    • #9
    • 11th Jul 17, 1:47 PM
    JBond - thanks for the response, and you're spot on.

    I've been doing the role on a secondment basis, and it was just a matter of securing this on a permanent basis; an offer which was made, but subsequently retracted, as I took time to decide on the lower salary. Thinking about it now, it does appear that the lower salary was a ploy to deter me from accepting it. The recruiting manager had said that I would get the role prior to the interview too, but I suspected that was because he wanted to keep me motivated in the role. The formal offer was great, but retracting it has really annoyed me.

    I can't believe a manager can do this and get away with it! Needless to say, I don't intend on working for that manager.
    • jbond
    • By jbond 11th Jul 17, 3:06 PM
    • 62 Posts
    • 18 Thanks
    jbond
    I've been doing the role on a secondment basis, and it was just a matter of securing this on a permanent basis; an offer which was made, but subsequently retracted, as I took time to decide on the lower salary.
    Originally posted by amz84uk
    To the previous poster, what's the point of being on secondment, if you're not actually doing the job?

    Thinking about it now, it does appear that the lower salary was a ploy to deter me from accepting it. The recruiting manager had said that I would get the role prior to the interview too, but I suspected that was because he wanted to keep me motivated in the role. The formal offer was great, but retracting it has really annoyed me.
    Originally posted by amz84uk
    Personally, I reckon the manager had a nerve to lower the salary offer, which is kind of like kicking you in the teeth really, but like you said, it could have been a ploy. Even though you took 3 days, I'd say you had a very good reason for that. It's almost like you were being used in some way?
    If the manager had issues with your performance, you would or should have been well aware of those, because they would have discussed them with you.
    Also (to the other poster), salary is usually dependent on level of experience, NOT if you can actually do the job or not.

    I can't believe a manager can do this and get away with it! Needless to say, I don't intend on working for that manager.
    Originally posted by amz84uk
    Some managers just shouldn't BE managers, FULL STOP! But, that's life!
    • sangie595
    • By sangie595 11th Jul 17, 8:00 PM
    • 3,359 Posts
    • 5,583 Thanks
    sangie595
    To the other poster from the other poster - your opinion on the matter doesn't constitute law though. So your personal opinion is irrelevant. The manager withdraw the offer. It happens. You have no idea why and so you have no better theories than any of the rest of us. It doesn't mean there is something wrong with the manager at all. Again, just a theory like ours.

    To recruit someone else takes time and money. Why would the manager risk that (and still maybe not get the right person) if the OP already was the right person?

    One way or another, the job is gone. Why that is is anyone's guess. But it is not proof of poor management. Any more than it is proof of a poor employee. But not being right for a job is not the same thing as being poor at a job. Someone can be "good" but not "good enough" at the same time.
    • ohreally
    • By ohreally 11th Jul 17, 8:44 PM
    • 6,109 Posts
    • 4,650 Thanks
    ohreally
    OP can you end the secondment and return to your substantive post?
    • jbond
    • By jbond 11th Jul 17, 8:57 PM
    • 62 Posts
    • 18 Thanks
    jbond
    .....your opinion on the matter doesn't constitute law though.
    Originally posted by sangie595
    I never said it did! Never even mentioned law, you did!

    So your personal opinion is irrelevant.
    Originally posted by sangie595
    A bit like yours then? And everyone else on here?


    You have no idea why and so you have no better theories than any of the rest of us.
    Originally posted by sangie595
    The only idea I have, is based on the information that the OP has supplied.

    It doesn't mean there is something wrong with the manager at all.
    Originally posted by sangie595
    I never said there WAS anything wrong with the manager, I'm basing my theory opinions on the manager, again based on what the OP has said.

    To recruit someone else takes time and money. Why would the manager risk that (and still maybe not get the right person) if the OP already was the right person?
    But it is not proof of poor management. Any more than it is proof of a poor employee. But not being right for a job is not the same thing as being poor at a job. Someone can be "good" but not "good enough" at the same time.
    Originally posted by sangie595
    Again, my comments are based purely and only on what the OP has said. I can't based them on anything else. As far as I am aware, I still stand by most of my comments.

    The recruiting manager had said that I would get the role prior to the interview

    So, why the change of end result?

    It appears as if you may have limited experience of bad managers? All it takes is ONE bad manager, and that can screw an awful of things up! I'm not necessarily saying that the manager IS bad, but their actions and behaviour does seem odd, again, based on what the OP has said!
    • amz84uk
    • By amz84uk 12th Jul 17, 10:41 AM
    • 224 Posts
    • 40 Thanks
    amz84uk
    OP can you end the secondment and return to your substantive post?
    Originally posted by ohreally
    Yes, I can return to my substantive role which had a lower remuneration package.

    jbond seems to have fully grasped the situation that I'm in. I agree that it is a case of very poor management. I had been promised the role prior to the interview (as I had been doing this on a secondment basis), and also offered this following the interview. It was subsequently withdrawn though based on not being the right person for the role, yet the manager wanted me to stay in the team as a secondee (yep, the cheek)!

    I've had a good track of managers in the past, but this one has really riled me hard, and screwed an awful lot of things for me.
    • jbond
    • By jbond 14th Jul 17, 8:55 AM
    • 62 Posts
    • 18 Thanks
    jbond
    You said that your original role was going to be made redundant? So, you're really only got two options, stay or leave.

    You could try and find out from HR as to the reasons behind your managers decision, but I'm not sure whether they have to tell you or not, or even if they'd know (I'm mainly looking at the salary issue here). There is a chance that the manager could get wind that you asked, which wouldn't help your relations with them.

    Other than that, I'm not sure what I'd do? I kind of think your options are limited.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,670Posts Today

8,056Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Byebye! I'm about to stop work & twitter, to instead spend glorious time with Mrs & mini MSE. Wishing u a lovely summer. See u in 10 days.

  • WARNING Did you start Uni in or after 2012? The interest's rising to 6.1%; yet it doesnt work like you think. See https://t.co/IQ8f0Vyetu RT

  • RT @JanaBeee: @MartinSLewis Boris is the anomaly (coffee), the others are versions of normal (beer). Lots of same candidates = vote share d?

  • Follow Martin