Redundancy pooling! Manager’s integrity

collectablebabe

At present we are going through restructuring with a number of staff being made redundant. In all about 40% of staff has to go. This process is being carried out by being put in a redundancy pool, with the manager’s assessing the staff on a number of criteria and well as sickness. This was all suppose to be done confidentially by each line manager. Our line manager has discussing team members performance with other team members asking their opinions on certain people! They have also told one member of staff they have been marked people down because they are part time, this seems unfair, it shouldn’t be how many hours you work but your capability to do the job. They keep making comments about the score they have given other member of staff and what scores other managers are giving in other places that this issues effects.

This just seems all very unprofessional to me and if I desperately needed to keep my job I would be taking it further

I really get on with my manager and wouldn’t want to get them in trouble, but it seems very casual what is happening as it could mean a difference of someone keeping their job of being made redundant.

I’ve not been in this situation before so I don’t know what the correct procedure should be , but it seems to me this isn’t right!

Scooby_Drew

They have also told one member of staff they have been marked people down because they are part time

---

As far as I know, dismissing someone based on working part time is automatically wrongful dismissal... i.e. a tribunal would instantly find in favour of the employee. Well worth double checking!

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/RedundancyAndLeavingYourJob/Dismissal/DG_10026692

See: Dismissal relating to part-time or fixed-term work

getmore4less

I really get on with my manager and wouldn’t want to get them in trouble

By not doing anything that is exaclty what could happen

Why not point out to the manger (as a friend) that they are at serious risk of a ET if they don't do this properly so to make sure that any criteria they use are well documented along with the instruction on hoe to apply and that this information has come from higher up or HR or legal representaion to cover themselves.

jazzyman01

Very unprofessional to discuss the scoring with other staff that are involved in the redundancy.

It is likely that the p/t workers are female rather than male. Therefore treating them differently to full time employees is very likely to result in an ET application for sex discrimination.

collectablebabe

The part time member of staff that had been marked down, is female and the same grade as myself. She was told, as she only worked so many hours a week she wouldn't be marked the same as the full time members as she wasn't didn't work as often.

There is so many things that is wrong about the way our manager has assessed the staff. It is laughable if is wasn’t serious that it could mean the difference to some people keeping their job or being made redundant.


You would really have to work here to appreciate what is happening.

Everyone is unhappy about the whole situation, but none wants to speak up.

There are 12 sites that are affected by the restructuring, all the staff are going into the redundancy pool, around 40% are being made redundant. We should be getting our assessments back some time next week for us to look at and comment on. Then they go to top management and HR to make a final decision.

Sorry but what does ET stand for?

I work in local government department

jazzyman01

Sorry ET is employment tribunal.

If you are in a local government are the unions not involved in the consultations? If so I would bring it up with them.

Irrespective of the hours that she works, if the selection matrix is seen to be treating her differently because of her being part-time then it is very likely she would have a claim for sex discrimination if her employment was terminated.

gregg1

the scoring matrix HAS to be seen to be fair and transparent and if it is not then they are leaving themselves wide open to litigation. They should explain exactly how and why they arrived at the scores.

This is a problem which is arising at the moment where I work and the unions have pointed out that the lack of transparency i.e. failure to indicate how the scores have been arrived at, could give rise to an accusation of "cherry picking". Lack of transparency can mean that the overall selection process is fundamentally flawed. If you are in a union I suggest you get them involved quickly.

SarEl

collectablebabe wrote: »

The part time member of staff that had been marked down, is female and the same grade as myself. She was told, as she only worked so many hours a week she wouldn't be marked the same as the full time members as she wasn't didn't work as often.

If this statement can be proven then it is a clear case of indirect sex discrimination and actionable in law unless they amend their process.