Redundancy question from newbie

YllamYlla

Hello all, first time poster here who would appreciate some advice/information from all you helpful people out there. I have had a look at the various information sources regarding redundancy, however none directly answers my query at all… so here goes:

Thankfully (at the moment) I am not at risk from redundancy, however I now have a lot of extra work assigned to me that was previously & solely done by a colleague who took Early Voluntary Retirement when it was offered to them. I was under the impression that if EVR was taken, then the role and its duties were also ‘redundant’, or am I living under false pretences? I would just like to know where I stand regarding this issue.

Many thanks.

Jarndyce

If they took voluntary retirement then there was no redundancy.

Had your collague been made redundant, providing there had been a genuine diminishing need for staff in that area, then the redundancy could have been fair. Even then, nothing that happened at the time or subsequently has any legal implications for you, only for the person made redundant. But the fact that you have been able to absorb what was left of their work suggests that there was not a full job left for them, and that a redundancy would have been genuine. All of this is academic however, as the colleague took VR.

SarEl

YllamYlla wrote: »

I was under the impression that if EVR was taken, then the role and its duties were also ‘redundant’, or am I living under false pretences?

Yes, you are living under false pretences There is nothing in the law, irrespective of what kind of redundancy is taken, that says that the duties are redundant! It is the position not the workload that is redundant, and as long as there is a reduction in headcount - fewer people left doing the job(s) - then it is a redundancy. It is a myth that redundancies are about falling workloads or falling business - there is no reason why there has to be any reduction in the amount of work being done.

RuthnJasper

SarEl wrote: »

Yes, you are living under false pretences There is nothing in the law, irrespective of what kind of redundancy is taken, that says that the duties are redundant! It is the position not the workload that is redundant, and as long as there is a reduction in headcount - fewer people left doing the job(s) - then it is a redundancy. It is a myth that redundancies are about falling workloads or falling business - there is no reason why there has to be any reduction in the amount of work being done.

Tell me about it! I now have the workload of 2½ people, with no extra pay, thanks to the current climate (plus the added treat of my salary being frozen for 3 years - yippieee!!!).

I'm lucky to have a job, I guess, and there are plenty of folks worse-off than me. Got to keep smiling, haven't you?!

YllamYlla

Thanks to all who have taken the time to respond to my question, I now have a much greater understanding of this issue.

I’m probably in a similar position to RuthnJasper, I realise that I’m still very lucky to have a job that I enjoy doing. However (as with many people) it now comes with more responsibilities, fewer colleagues and less £. Still, I am looking at the positives. I now have a much wider and more interesting role since this time last year, I am learning new skills everyday and this will definitely help me in the future.

Once again thanks for your replies. :T

getmore4less

RuthnJasper wrote: »

Tell me about it! I now have the workload of 2½ people, with no extra pay, thanks to the current climate (plus the added treat of my salary being frozen for 3 years - yippieee!!!).

I'm lucky to have a job, I guess, and there are plenty of folks worse-off than me. Got to keep smiling, haven't you?!

I think the employer sees this as 2.5 people had the workload of 1.

If it is getting done their interpritaion is correct not yours.

RuthnJasper

getmore4less wrote: »

I think the employer sees this as 2.5 people had the workload of 1.

If it is getting done their interpritaion is correct not yours.

Well the urgent bits are getting done as long as I work, on average, two hours of overtime per day and don't have a lunch (or any other) break and never take a holiday. Alas, the lesser things fall by the wayside and my colleagues have been told by the team leader not to ask for my support...

For my role, the county is divided into three parts. The North has 25% of the county and two staff in "my" role, the South has 25% of the county and two and a half staff in "my" role, the central area has 50% of the county and there's only me.

But, as I said, I am lucky compared to many. A previous job caused me two nervous breakdowns - I will not let that happen again. I do as much as I can, and the rest just has to wait. It doesn't do to brood on work problems. Plus, I enjoy the work and - however bad it gets it still isn't as bad as the old job that made me ill. LOTS to be thankful for. x

RuthnJasper

YllamYlla wrote: »

Thanks to all who have taken the time to respond to my question, I now have a much greater understanding of this issue.

I’m probably in a similar position to RuthnJasper, I realise that I’m still very lucky to have a job that I enjoy doing. However (as with many people) it now comes with more responsibilities, fewer colleagues and less £. Still, I am looking at the positives. I now have a much wider and more interesting role since this time last year, I am learning new skills everyday and this will definitely help me in the future.

Once again thanks for your replies. :T

Thanks YllamYlla - great post. I know it's tough, but you're looking at it in the best light. You never know - this situation could be the making of you!

But please don't suffer in silence. There's always support on here for those who need it - and please feel free to PM me if you ever need to sound-off and have a rant. I completely understand how you feel and am always happy to listen/read.

Keep smiling (even if it's not always easy)! xx

SarEl

RuthnJasper wrote: »

I work, on average, two hours of overtime per day and don't have a lunch (or any other) break and never take a holiday....

...A previous job caused me two nervous breakdowns - I will not let that happen again.

Really? I am not going to criticise the two hours overtime (look at me in my spare time here!) or the lack of lunch breaks - although I am going to tell you that the laws on health and safety and working time directives are there for a reason, and that reason is not to give legislators something to do. But never taking holiday? No matter who you are, no matter what your job is or how much it motivates you, this is a serious health problem waiting to happen. People's bodies are not designed to work like this, and if you aren't feeling the effects of it now, that doesn't mean that one day you won't. Working like this causes irreparable damage to the body. Nobody needs heart disease or the other long-term effects of prolonged working under stress - and the people who think that aren't under stress are the ones that usually are, especially if they are working like this. Do yourself a favour - stop before it gets out of hand. Take your holidays. Public sector workers (and I assume you are from what you said) get little enough credit from many for the work they do - but it certainly isn't worth killing yourself over. And believe me, whether you know it or not, you are. I am shocked that your employer permits you to not take your holidays - they are acting very irresponsibly.

RuthnJasper

SarEl wrote: »

Really? I am not going to criticise the two hours overtime (look at me in my spare time here!) or the lack of lunch breaks - although I am going to tell you that the laws on health and safety and working time directives are there for a reason, and that reason is not to give legislators something to do. But never taking holiday? No matter who you are, no matter what your job is or how much it motivates you, this is a serious health problem waiting to happen. People's bodies are not designed to work like this, and if you aren't feeling the effects of it now, that doesn't mean that one day you won't. Working like this causes irreparable damage to the body. Nobody needs heart disease or the other long-term effects of prolonged working under stress - and the people who think that aren't under stress are the ones that usually are, especially if they are working like this. Do yourself a favour - stop before it gets out of hand. Take your holidays. Public sector workers (and I assume you are from what you said) get little enough credit from many for the work they do - but it certainly isn't worth killing yourself over. And believe me, whether you know it or not, you are. I am shocked that your employer permits you to not take your holidays - they are acting very irresponsibly.

As always SarEl, you're right. But, as our department manager was good enough to make clear to us all: "If you don't like it - there's the door." God bless him.

SarEl

RuthnJasper wrote: »

As always SarEl, you're right. But, as our department manager was good enough to make clear to us all: "If you don't like it - there's the door." God bless him.

Holidays are an entitlement; breaks during the working day are rights. The door he is indicating if he attempts to prevent you from exercising your rights and entitlements is the one marked "Employment Tribunal this way".