Was This Lawful??

slayed100

I began my employment with a company as quality control assistant. I did this for two years and was then moved to the role of quality control inspector but my contract was never changed from assistant.

Following almost 10 years with this same company, I was made redundant, as an inspector, at the end of February.

There were other redundancies which resulted in the job of quality control assistant becoming vacant. As my contract stood as being employed as assistant I believed that I should be offered the job. I was not.

Now, three months later, I find that the company have employed someone else to fill the role of assistant. I thought that if my contract was for the role of assistant then I should either be given the chance to take the job or the company cannot employ someone in that job for six months.

So, was this lawful on the part of the company? I will pursue this if I am right and in court if necessary.

Thanks for any advice.

Itsgottabedone

I'm no expert, but I don't think it's commonplace for a new contract of employment to be given when someone is promoted within the same company. The changes (increased salary, responsibilities, etc) would have been explained and accepted at the time you were promoted and so when your role as inspector was made redundant the company was not obliged to offer you the assistant role.

Hopefully someone with more than a slight knowledge of employment law will post to confirm your rights.

So sorry you find yourself in this position, and I wish you good luck in the future.

LittleVoice

Your contract was changed by the fact that you were doing the other work, were known by the new job title, were paid at the appropriate rate, and received any additional benefits. You probably had a letter saying you were now an inspector but, even if not, your contract was changed.

However, if you were capable of doing the work of the assistant and it was vacant at the time of your redundancy you should have been told of the opportunity and considered for the position if you would have liked it.

The belief that there is some kind of "time window" during which previously redundant jobs cannot be advertised for new recruits is false. So if the assistant job was not available at the time you left, there is no law which says they should have contacted you.

Cornball

Did you receive a contract ammendment letter or any other notification letter when you changed positions? Most companies don't issue new contracts when promoting within.

getmore4less

No one can find any law that says you can't employ people imediately after making people redundant.

Companies must be able to do this since they may for example be making people redundant because there are no orders, then a big order comes in.


Anyway, in your case.

If they were making people redundant how did this vacancy become avaialble?
Was it filled immediately?
Was the vacancy filled from the pool of assistants that were at risk of reduncancy or someone else?

Would the assistant job result in a drop in pay and/or other changes from the job of inspector? The company could make a case that the job was not a suitable alternative on the grounds of pay and status allthough it is sometimes sensible to offer lower staus jobs to more senior people if there are no more suitable alternative

The final point is that you would now be outside the 3 months for making a claim anyway.

LittleVoice

getmore4less wrote: »

The company could make a case that the job was not a suitable alternative on the grounds of pay and status allthough it is sometimes sensible to offer lower staus jobs to more senior people if there are no more suitable alternative

They could try that but I believe it would fail - any employer making redundancies should ensure that redundant employees are advised of any job which could be suitable. It is up to the employee to decide whether they are willing to drop in status etc not for the employer to make the decision on their behalf without consulting them. (But this scenario may not be the situation for the OP in any case.)

slayed100

I did not have an ammendment letter or any other notification other than a verbal 'we want you to do an inspectors job instead'.

The role of assistant became vacant when the current assistant was promoted.

I once recalled my contract when I was doing a temporary seccondment prior to a hospital spell. In that instance I pulled out my contract when they told me I HAD to work weekends. They (the company) backed down and upheld my contract.

The status and pay, as you point out, should be my decision to make. The way I see it they have made me redundant despite my experience and qualifications, advertised the job and employed someone else with no relevant experience. Doesn't make sense to me!


Many thanks for all the help, it is appreciated.

darich

slayed100 wrote: »

The way I see it they have made me redundant despite my experience and qualifications, advertised the job and employed someone else with no relevant experience. Doesn't make sense to me!


Many thanks for all the help, it is appreciated.

As someone else pointed out the company can pay someone off and re-fill the post without having to wait for any set time limit. It could be that you were paid off because the company foresaw a lull in the business. There may have been an unexpected upturn again, or it may have happened sooner than they envisaged.

As you point out, the new person has no relevant experience, possibly fewer/less relevant qualifications but those reasons then justifies the company's reason to pay them less and effectively get the same work from them.

I'm no expert on employment law but going by what you've said it's a possibility.

LittleVoice

When did the assistant post become vacant? You refer to the "current assistant" being promoted. If you refer to them as "current" then I have to assume they were in the assistant post in February when you were redundant and so when you were redundant there was no assistant post vacant.

The timing of the redundancy and the vacancy are crucial.

slayed100

There was an assistant who was promoted one week before my redundancy. I was made aware by my manager that the assistants post was vacant before my final working day. Naturally I pointed out that my contract was for the vacant (assistants) role but was told that I was being made redundant as an inspector.

I agree that this is not simple but there was a vacancy, for which I was qualified by way of two years experience, before I was made redundant. For this reason I say that I should have been offered the job and not been made redundant. I believe that to make me redundant and employ someone with no experience to do the job described on my contract is not just unfair but unlawful.

The question of money is a matter that could have been discussed. If I had been offered the job but with less pay then that should have been my decision as has already been pointed out. I was not consulted or considered.

LittleVoice

Here's information about making a claim to an ET - http://www.employmenttribunals.gov.uk/Documents/FormsGuidance/MakingAClaim.pdf

However, I do not think you will be able to bring a claim there because we are now more than 3 months after your employment ended. You may like to check though whether there can be an extension to that in your case as I understand extensions can be granted in some situations.