Unfair Dissmisal through points scoring ?

jamesdeare

To cut a long story short, on Friday my company was in advanced stages of redundancy on the points scoring phase and I was told i was one of the 2 employees that would be made redundant as i was in the bottom 2 out of 8.

upon reading my scores i was very annoyed on how i had been scored eg. i work at a desk on a laptop and my score for health and safety was 6 out of 10

another thing that makes me so annoyed is an employee who is catagoricaly the worst emploee in my department ie persistant absent not intrested at work has not been made redundant !

I have a meeting with the director in the morning where i am going to disbute my scores and am looking for some ammunition to take in with me so any help on where i stand would be really good.



Thanks

LittleVoice

Can you explain to us how your organisation thinks "health and safety" has a score to be considered in deciding which positions are redundant? Did they test staff using a computer program to see how aware you were or what?

jamesdeare

no tests were undertaken, i was scored by 2 people i have seen roughly ten times in 2 years of working there.

the criteria was:

skills/knowledge
quantity of work
quality of work
reliability
health and safety
forward planning

i do not agree with any of the scores apart from my reliability which is excellent, apart from that not one of the scores is more than 6 out of 10 !

this is even after my boss (also made redundant) recommended me for promotion !

LittleVoice

Is there a union? If so, have they agreed the fairness of the process?

I would certainly want to know more detail of what the scores are supposed to represent.

If they haven't actually used an objective test, I don't see how they could validate a score on H&S. Only "quantity of work" is objectively clear IMHO. Everything else is subjective unless components of the score are actually measurable (eg if quality of work is measuring percentage rejects on the manufacture of widgets). Sometimes people use "scores" because the numbers make things seem hard facts when they aren't.

Certainly find out what the so called criteria are actually reporting.

SomeBozo

Its the position thats made redundant, its the person.

Bozo

LittleVoice

SomeBozo wrote: »

Its the position thats made redundant, its the person.

Bozo

However, the OP is concerned about the criteria for selecting the person to suffer the consequences of redundancy. And in the situation of the OP it could well be that the 8 people are all in the same role and it is about sharing out the work - so a person in the role is indeed redundant, not just one position.