I've been put 'at risk' but I think unfairly!

FairyElephant_2

Hiya,

as expected when I went to the meeting I had been 'summoned' to yesterday I was told I have been out 'at risk' of redundancy (but from the tone of the comments made I am under no illusion that this is a formality and I am def. going to be made redundant in 1 month's time!).

My main issues are:

There are 3 other people in the company who do a similar job. None of them has been put at risk - only me.
I was originally told yesterday that there 'have to be cuts in the admin function' - then told that my work will be spread out between the others, as several of their contracts have been lost so they have spare capacity! I asked why none of them were 'at risk' and was told it was not necessary!

I asked for a copy of the selection criteria which had been used to make their decision, and was told by HR that they didn't think it was 'appropriate at this time' to give this to me, but they would be happy to discuss it at a future meeting! At the end of the meeting I again asked for the criteria in writing, but was told the same thing.

I am the only one of the team who works part-time (4 days a week),so wonder if they think it's easier to get rid of me rather than anyone else...but I have told them that I would be happy to go back to full-time - I voluntarily dropped my hours 2 months ago as my workload had fallen.

The HR rep, having said at the end of the meeting - 'contact me if you have any questions at all' - I now found out is on holiday from today until the end of next week, and no-one is covering her work!!!!!!!

The more I think about this, the more I feel that I am being treated unfairly, and the more mad I am getting!

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

Its not unfair.

If the PT position is the one to go then tough. It wouldnt be fair for the employer to increase your hours to FT so that you couldnt be made redundant then have to make someone else in a different role redundant.

Far more risk of unfairness that way.

Pete111

As the roles are the same (is this 100% true?) It would have been better for the company to put all relevant staff at risk given you have already indicated you would work full time again (though I understand why this may be seen as harsh on the others). You then have a simple 4 into 3 selection process. It may be that you are the most suitable person to be selected but they really should not do it soley on the basis you work 4 days a week so you are right to enquire on the basis you have.

Re the rights of part time workers - See the below from the Directgov website (BTW justifying something objectively is no cakewalk at tribunal)
Selection for promotion and transfer, or for redundancy

Being part-time can't be used as a reason for selection for transfer or redundancy, or refusing a promotion, unless it can be justified objectively.

If you feel strongly about this you may want to consider contacting ACAS for their take on it.

ceridwen

The thing that strikes me is that you cut your hours "2 months ago" to part-time due to seeing that there was decreased workload - oh dear.....

Personally - I think that the "writing must have been on the wall" to some extent at that point - and I do wish you hadnt succumbed to pressure to "voluntarily decide" to cut your workhours yourself.

I guess the best you can do right now is to see if you can get the rest of your hours back - and get the job back up to full-time. Your redundancy pay (if it comes to it) will be based on your salary - better for it to be based on the full-time pay you used to have, rather than the part-time pay you are now getting.

I have an idea that I have read somewhere that its the pay level you have received during the last 12 weeks that redundancy payout would be based on????? Guess someone else could clarify whether that is the correct time period there.

To me - it sounds like they had figured out a couple of months ago that they intended to make you redundant, sat down and tried to work out how to minimise the redundancy payout to you and decided that a good way to do it would be to reduce the salary that that payout would be based on - and then persuaded you that it was in your best interests to go part-time ("think of how much you could do with that extra time and its not as if you would lose much money") - and it worked...

So - do try and see if there is a way for you to redress that situation now.

Good luck.

pawpurrs

If the roles are the same then all members should have been put at risk, and a selection criteria used to establish who is to be made redundant.

When you were called to the meeting you should have had a letter, saying what the meeting was about and informed of your right to be accompanied to that meeting.

If they failed to take these steps its automatically unfair dismissal.

jazzyman01

Agree - if jobs are the same all should have been put at risk.

Are the others female or male - potential for discrimination claim too.

Disagree that you would have a letter. Usual form is to notify that redundancy is a possibility and then invite for a meeting. At this meeting and any subsequent consultation meetings you have the right to have a colleague or union rep attend with you.

Why would they not give you their selection criteria? It is clear that they have made their decision as no-one else has been placed at risk!

Do you have more than 1 years service?

dbuk44

pawpurrs wrote: »

If they failed to take these steps its automatically unfair dismissal*.

* assuming that the OP has been in employment for 1 year or more.

Pete111

Assuming you have the requistite amount of service, and if this goes to redundancy, I would appeal on the basis of unfair selection if I was in your shoes. From what you have written, the others should have been included in the 'pot' and a proper selection process run. You have raised this already and been given the company response so it is up to you whether you reiterate it over the coming days/weeks.

You do not necessarily need to have been given a letter inviting you to the meeting (though this is common - I always make sure these go out when doing redundacies for completeness) but you should have been told you could bring a TU rep or colleague. If you were not made aware this is another point you should raise in any appeal.

In the meantime (as the redundancy has not yet been confirmed) you should have a word with ACAS. If they confirm the company may have dropped the ball it may be useful to reference this conversation in an appeal letter.

Yoour end game here is unlikely to be avoiding redundancy as it appears clear they have you in their sights. It is more likely that a positive result for you will be an extra payout from the company as the points you raise lead them to worry that they have cocked up the process.

If made redundant you have little to lose by appealing (it is your right if you feel aggrieved) but should consider carefully the likely benefits of pushing past any appeal (ie to get a lawyer involved) if the appeal brings no positive outcome. It is very stressful and potentially costly to go to tribunal etc.

Hope this helps

FairyElephant_2

Thanks everyone.

Yes Jazzyman and dbuk - I have been here 3 years.

I spoke to ACAS and they agree with my main points: 1/ they must give me the criteria in writing, and 2/ the other employees doing the same job should be put 'at risk' at the same time. As I have raised both these points at the mtg and been told 'no' to both, I am not going to tell them again!

Thanks Pete111! Yes I agree - what I am aiming for is prolonging the process (while they carry out the steps they should have been taking!) and/or getting an extra payout. I know the writing is on the wall for me, but as I am currently 6 wks pregnant (not told work that yet!) I will have a harder time getting another job in the next few months, and won't be able to be working anywhere long enough to quality for maternity benefits from a new employer, so I am pretty stuffed! The best I can hope for is getting as much dosh out of them as poss. I guess.

Oh - and I was not told that I could bring anyone to the mtg last week. I was also not told at that mtg that I could bring anyone to subsequent mtgs, although when I asked they said I could take a colleague or TU rep (rich, as they don't officially recognise a TU!), although this was said somewhat begrudgingly!

To give 2 more examples of how bad they are at this....my supervisor knew nothing about it! I just spoke to her now (she was off on Friday) and still no-one has officially told her she's losing staff from her team! And she denies that there is 'spare capacity' in the rest of the team to take up my workload!
Also, the HR person dealing with this, having said at the mtg on Thursday 'you can give me call if you have any questions or want to talk anything over' - then went on holiday on Friday for a week! I couldn't get hold of her on Friday, and when I found out she was off I spoke to her supervisor, who confirmed the holiday and said that no-one was covering her work and I would have to wait until she got back - so nothing in writing for another week, and no-one to address my questions to.......Shambles or what?!?!?!?!?!?!

Pete111

Agree it doesn't sound like they have really thought about this process properly which may well help your cause (though people are allowed to take holiday!) It's pretty poor the your right to take a companion was not mentioned however - again it points to lack of thought about the process (it's not a hard thing to mention!)

Out of interest do you work for a large company?

lonestar1

Think the next time I asked them to see the selection criterea I would remind them that regardless of if they think its appropriate or not you have the right to request it