I'm 'at risk' whilst temps have contracts extended

sagalout1954

Out of a team of 6 my role is the only one considered 'at risk' and consultation has started (though I haven't had a face-to-face yet, the Unions have been advised in writing of a potential redundant post).

I'm aware that at least 1 of the 6 (we aren't co-located) has been on a fixed term contract which has subsequently been extended - after I (a permanent member of staff) was put on the 'at risk' list.

My question is, in view of Employment Law, should my employers have done this. I also have suspicion that a percentage of my workload, the parts of it which haven't been cut altogether, may well be passing to this person to do.

cazziebo

Unfortunately, this is common and often usage of temps goes up in times of redundancy. The temps won't be part of the permanent headcount, so will not be at threat of redundancy. Depending on how bad things are, they may have their contracts terminated at some point. Effectively,it's the same fate as permanent staff but different process.

Reading your post though, I'm unsure as to why you have assumed that it's only your job that's at risk. If your team works as a team, with shared tasks, then you could argue that it's not only your role that should be at risk. However, it is feasible that the tasks you carry out have been judged to be able to be shared among the other team members.

I think you need more information about the process before you can decide what action to take.

woody01

The temps won't be part of the permanent headcount, so will not be at threat of redundancy

Sorry but that isn't quite correct.
Temporary staff, IF on a fixed term contract, are included in total headcount.

cazziebo

woody01 wrote: »

Sorry but that isn't quite correct.
Temporary staff, IF on a fixed term contract, are included in total headcount.

Not always - and I've found it can change "politically" where people on probation periods are counted out! There aren't any hard and fast rules in how companies categorise their workforce. Personally, I wouldn't count FTC employees in any strategic decision making or resource planning, but might do in financial analysis.

In redundancy situations, where I'd be looking for permanent headcount reduction, FTC employees wouldn't feature - there's no long term saving.

(but Woody, I do hate to disagree with you )

woody01

All Corporate organisations do actaully count Fixed Term Contractors in.
I do not know if you are used to smaller businesses, but in large corporations it is always the case.

The reason being, is that fixed term temporary workers have exactly the same rights as permanent full time ones (besides redundancy) <----fact

cazziebo

woody01 wrote: »

All Corporate organisations do actaully count Fixed Term Contractors in.
I do not know if you are used to smaller businesses, but in large corporations it is always the case.

The reason being, is that fixed term temporary workers have exactly the same rights as permanent full time ones (besides redundancy) <----fact

erm - BT & Virgin big, large and corporate enough for you?

Spirit_2

We count temps & FTC in the headcount (afterall they are not free) however the substantive staff are the only one's who accrue redundancy entitlements. I agree the temps and FTC are 'cheaper' to shed. They are an important strata of the workforce in managing a downturn.

woody01

cazziebo wrote: »

erm - BT & Virgin big, large and corporate enough for you?

The fact remains they are counted.
I am a senior manager in a global business (15K+ employees), so i can categorically say, this is how the headcounts are made, at least within our kind of business.

It is also the same within all the largest global electronics and innovation businesses.