Sexual discrimination/equal pay issue

hedger

bendix wrote: »

Why is it idiotic? It's a fact.

You complain she is underpaid for the role, then she gets canned. If she was doing the same job as well as her peers, it would make more sense for the company to get rid of other higher paid people.

Ergo, even on a lower salary she's perceived as being dispensible, and they'd rather keep the higher paid people.

It's not good when people lose their jobs but - tbh - it's hard to feel empathy in this case.

yeah sure you know it all :rolleyes:

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

hedger wrote: »

yeah sure you know it all :rolleyes:

Why is it then you feel more expensive colleagues were kept on?

Racism ???:rolleyes::rotfl:

I mean it couldnt be anything to do with your wife not being anywere near as qualified or important as you seem to think

st999

2 women work in an office and their skills are equal in every way. They have also been working for the same length of time, they even started the same day. One is an old spinster aged about 40, the other is aged about 25 and just got married. The younger one comes in every month and say damm I'm not pregnant this month. The company decides that because of the present economic climate and lack of work one of the 2 women has to be made redundant. Who would you pick? The work picked the one who just got married. And yes, it happened where I worked 10 years ago.
Try proving that was the reason she was made redundant.
Has your wife ever mentioned that she would like a baby to anyone at her work?

Fatal.

Zazen999

The reason that your wife was made redundant is because the boss knows he should not have shown her the other person's wages, and is using this to get rid before she can do anything about it. I suspect the wheels were put in motion the day after he told HR what he had done.

hedger

Zazen999 wrote: »

The reason that your wife was made redundant is because the boss knows he should not have shown her the other person's wages, and is using this to get rid before she can do anything about it. I suspect the wheels were put in motion the day after he told HR what he had done.

at last someone who can see what really happened.
one man has forced my wife out - i dont care who believes it but that is fact. nothing to do with her qualifications, experience, work - it was simply that she had the nerve to query her pay. the redundancy process has been shambolic - again that is a fact (no consultation with employees, assessment criteria not agreed with employees and kept secret, assessors changed etc). almost every rule in the book has been broken imo. heres wat happened yday - the wife knew she was goin so was no surpsrise when she was called in and handed her letter. no advice, no mention of appeal, no comment on alternative employment within the company. she went to HR and asked for a copy of the appeals procedure. HR manager "er I havent got it but i can get u something in an hour" he then comes back near the end of the day and leaves a document on my wifes desk - a copy of a disciplinary procedure. "are you sure thats the right document? this is for disciplinary issues" he was asked.
HR "theres a paragraph in it about appeals"
wife "yeah but that refers to appealing a disciplinary issue not redundancy!"
HR "well just drop me an email saying ur appealing!"

the incompetence is unbelievable but hopefully it will go against them. Solicitor is now preparing a detailed appeal letter

hedger

LinasPilibaitisisbatman wrote: »

Why is it then you feel more expensive colleagues were kept on?

Racism ???:rolleyes::rotfl:

I mean it couldnt be anything to do with your wife not being anywere near as qualified or important as you seem to think

Im glad you find this funny

Zazen999

Having been in the same situation years ago [female in male dominated construction environment, more qualified and at least 5k less pay etc], I can empathise.

Then, we had nothing to back us up. Now, I hope you throw the book at them.

Good luck.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

hedger wrote: »

at last someone who can see what really happened.

Everyone gets it Hedger.

Pete111

Thanks for the update Hedger

Re the redundancy. It's worth noting that management are not obliged to agree selection criteria with staff, they just have to be able to justify the criteria used if called up on it. In addition, the 'rule book' you mention is far less clear when small numbers of redundancies are involved. The level of risk regarding whether or not you ran a fair process is more likely to hinge on whether the companies actions followed the broad principle of the relevant regs and /or were deemed 'reasonable' in the circumstances.

From what you write, there are holes in their process on this front (and the HR bod is a twonk) but that's just my opinion. I am a bit surprised TBH. If I suspect there is a grievance/appeal coming down the line (which they surely did) then I always take extra care with the formal bits to ensure they stand up to scrutiny and you don't have to worry about them....it's not that hard to do!

Still, potentially more ammo for the appeal as you say

P

bendix

For sale: one dead horse. All offers accepted.