Told I must Change Jobs

sawutdee1

Hello i wonder if someone could help please.

Was told October last year that the USA company were closing our UK factory.
I've been given my leaving date, 30th Sept 2010 this is the date the factory will close.

I work in the Laboratory and have a contract that says this.

I have been told that i must now work on the production lines as from Monday.

The reason being , they have let a lot of the production workers leave and are now trying to build up stocks to enable them to find suppliers to toll manufacture the products we make.
They have also sold off one of our products and are contracted to produce 800,000m/month to the company that bought it until the closing date.

They are struggling to meet these deadlines as most of the remaining production operatives are refusing to do overtime.

When I had my consultation they said they would like me to be flexible, which I agreed to. But I think a total transfer to another dept. doing a completely different job is a more than flexible.

Do I have grounds to say no to this.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thank you

maninthestreet

NO, you don't have grounds to decline this reasonable request. Presumably, you are going to be made redundannt on the 30th September no matter what happens?

sawutdee1

Yes I will be made redundant on the 30th Sept. as the factory is closing, along with all the production workers and production support staff.

Can you explain to me why it is reasonable please?

I've been given notice that my job is being made redundant on the 30th Sept.
Now they are asking me to do a completely different job.
A job where they have made people redundant in the last 3 months.

My contract states that: the employee shall serve the company as a QC Technician or in such other capacity of a LIKE STATUS as the company may require.

Going from testing materials in a laboratory to humping heavy weights on a production line doesn't seem very LIKE to me.


Thank you for your response

McKneff

I honestly cant see why you are moaning about it, its a job !!!!!!.
and only for 3 months. There are people on here who would kill
for a job for 3 months. Just get on with it man.

Probably the other alternative is to refuse the job and forego all your redundancy money.

Why would you say that the company 'stole' your money.
It was very likely your pension company, some charges or other.
You need to be careful making accusations on a public forum, you can be traced.
Ive lost count of the people who have slated their companies on facebook and got the sack.

Get the sack and again, no redundancy, bad reference, hard to get another job.

sawutdee1

Don't recall naming the company.

I'm a 57 year old office worker being asked to do a job a fit 20 year old would struggle with..

If there are any fit 20 year olds on here that want it they can have it.

So I take it that my contract of employment is not worth the paper it is written on.

Thank you for your reply.

McKneff

You dont have to name the company, if you are on here and traced they, whoever recognises you will know the company you work for.

And if you had given more information ie, your age, in your first post, it may have made a difference to peoples opinions.
Personally, in your shoes I would also be a bit miffed. Are you in a union,
Solicitors often give a half hour free session.

Failing all that, go on the sick for the last 3 months, presumably if its a big company they will pay full sick pay (and you get your money back that they stole from you) Bit dishonest, I know, but lots of people do it.

And good luck by the way.;)

lucylucky

sawutdee1 wrote: »

Don't recall naming the company.

I'm a 57 year old office worker being asked to do a job a fit 20 year old would struggle with..

If there are any fit 20 year olds on here that want it they can have it.

So I take it that my contract of employment is not worth the paper it is written on.

Just like my pension.

Thank you for your reply.

I have no idea what age has to do with it. Staff should be capable of doing a job, it surely doesn't depend on how old they are?

Does the work they have offered you include new skills, extra training, different shifts?

You may be able to persuade them that it is an unreasonable request however they may disagree in which case they could well sack you with, as has been pointed out already, the loss of redundancy payment.

As to your pension who have you complained to about the "theft" of monies?

woody01

You never know who is reading this.......

RobertoMoir

lucylucky wrote: »

I have no idea what age has to do with it. Staff should be capable of doing a job, it surely doesn't depend on how old they are?

Well presumably the OP is capable of doing the job they are currently doing, but doesn't feel able to do the other job. That's perfectly possible you know.

Mupette

Would the company be breaking the law, they want you to do a job that previously they have made staff members redundant, so are they now saying that the job is not not redundant?

It sounds wrong that they should make people redundant as i assume the job no longer exists but... pull someone from another department to do the job that technically no longer exists?

lucylucky

RobertoMoir wrote: »

Well presumably the OP is capable of doing the job they are currently doing, but doesn't feel able to do the other job. That's perfectly possible you know.

It is but the OP said a 20 y/o would struggle. (for some reason)

Age has no relevance to the discussion, only the ability or otherwise of the OP to carry out the tasks asked by their employer.