We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Is my H.R acting properly ?
Comments
-
p00hsticks wrote: »FWIW, my reading of it is slightly different - there *are* internal jobs for them all, but not for as many hours as the original position (1/2 to 2/3 of the original hours), and possibly in a different shift pattern.
Ah, I see - yes you're right.
My point still stands, though, that the 'offer' perhaps wasn't as clear as the employees believed it to be, and they're only discovering that these jobs are part-time after they've declined the TUPE offer.
KiKi' <-- See that? It's called an apostrophe. It does not mean "hey, look out, here comes an S".0 -
Oh I agree entirely, on both counts. Unfortunately I know that people who didn't join a union and discover the fact that it wasn't so useless after all, still don't join unions until too late again!
But KiKi is correct - as I said previously, the only hope here is in what policy / terms were offered by the employer at the time, and what was actually promised - which I would lay bets isn't what the employees believed it was - because legally there is nothing really to go on. The problem I often see is that employees do things thinking they know what is what, but have seldom read the paperwork or the details thoroughly. They assume promises and protections they don't have, and unfortunately the law takes no account of the fact that you didn't know it.
Many many thanks to all who answered.
You are correct.Some employees were led to believe their were new positions being created in the "new" dept, alas due to budget constraints they are now not able. We were aware that there may be posts of reduced hours, but these hours are being cut further.
There was no actual paperwork to sign as such of the dis-interest to TUPE over to another company, our intention was merely are u interested yes/no on an email.p00hsticks wrote: »FWIW, my reading of it is slightly different - there *are* internal jobs for them all, but not for as many hours as the original position (1/2 to 2/3 of the original hours), and possibly in a different shift pattern.
We will have to interview for the new posts.....and yes you are correct , as they willbe for less hours than orginally informed.Ah, I see - yes you're right.
My point still stands, though, that the 'offer' perhaps wasn't as clear as the employees believed it to be, and they're only discovering that these jobs are part-time after they've declined the TUPE offer.
KiKi
Most definately ! The 'offer' wasn't written down and merely verbal.
Yes we have been 'led up the garden path' in that their 'offer' has changed after declining the TUPE offer.Am the proud holder of an Honours Degree
in tea-making.
Do people who keep giraffes have high overheads ?0 -
You must have chosen a top notch employment lawyer if that was the advice you got. Not. Join the union. They will tell you the answer.
Someone else made the enquiry with the Emp.Lawyer.
Other employees in the union have got nowhere with them..with some union staff even failing to attend the meetings we had.
You may have had previous good relationships with unions and I'm glad for you ...but ours are a complete waste of space.Sorry !Am the proud holder of an Honours Degree
in tea-making.
Do people who keep giraffes have high overheads ?0 -
because they might actually have to do some work in the private sector?
I've worked in the private sector for many years so am well aware of how much harder it is.I do not live in cloud cuckoo land !
If I left my organisation , i would do my uttermost not to work for them again...as daft as that may sound. They are a complete shambles from the top down.We have managers who want to have the Kudos of a Managerial title on their C.V. , can talk the right b*llsh*t buzzwords at interviews , and write the same cwap on their application forms yet when it comes down to the nitty gritty can do little and actually 'manage' !! They wouldn't last 5 mins in the private sector.He said quite clearly that they turned down the TUPE in favour of being transferred to another similar internal department. If I liked the company I worked in, then I'd prefer to stay rather than move to a different organisation.
TUPE was turned down by all employees it would have meant orking for a completely different company , located outside of a reasonable travelling distance and no guarantee of the same specific hours that we are currently working (for personal home-life circumstances) .
It seems (from my reading of it) that they were given a choice of TUPE or moving to a different internal role. They chose the latter. Only *after* declining TUPE did the organisation tell them that they can't ALL take the internal roles, so now it leaves 2/3 or 1/2 of them with no job, and no right to redundancy because they declined the TUPE offer.
Totally correct ..Thankyou for your understanding.
To assume that they don't want to actually do work in the private sector (as Russe11 did) is rather harsh and not at all what is indicated in the first post.
IF what the OP said (and my reading of it) is correct, then I think it's unfair - although perhaps perfectly legal - of the company to position them with a 'TUPE or another internal role?', then only tell them that there are not enough internal roles after the TUPE has been declined.
This is correct and where we think we are being ' had over '.
It seems our TUPE intention has ' expired ' and we are being told to accept the much less hours offer or...(almost) there's the door, have a nice day.
Obviously the legal points still stand, but if that's the case then the team may well have accepted the TUPE, knowing that the internal roles were not guaranteed, and that the hours etc are different. Perhaps the OP could tell us what the actual wording of the internal offer was (at the point of choice). It might not make a difference legally, but if the company led them to believe there were internal roles on the same T&Cs, that might have some bearing on the decision they made, I'm sure.
Just a different perspective.
KiKi
The internal offer wasn't and still isn't in writing (all verbal) .
We have been led to believe ,after declining other options, that
the new roles were available. The new roles have been scaled back
due to lack of proper planning by top management ...mostly how much it would cost to actually run the new dept !!Never too late to join a union.
But I agree re legal advice - like many posts on here, it can be paraphrased as 'Help - I have done something because I thought I would be better off and I am suddenly going to be worse off - I didn't think through the consequences of my decision and now I want someone else to provide me with the solution so that I don't have to take responsibility for my actions'.
Or is that a bit harsh!
I can see what you are thinking but I am not like some dimwit off the Jeremy Kyle show.
The team has not been given the best information from the start with what i would consider to be less than forthcoming communication as time has gone by.
When I posted this topic I wasn't looking for solutions , merely good honest advice from others who know better than I on the subject of employment rights/law etc etc.
Thankyou to all who gave their time in replying.Am the proud holder of an Honours Degree
in tea-making.
Do people who keep giraffes have high overheads ?0 -
chiefgoobster wrote: »If I left my organisation , i would do my uttermost not to work for them again...as daft as that may sound. Well, yes actually. You had your chance. You could have gone back to the private sector, which is obviously so much better run, via the TUPE. You had a job, and you had the chance to keep that job - employment isn't a pick and mix bar where you get to say "well, I don't like this and I don't like that but I'll have two of those". You refused to keep your own job, and to be perfectly frank you are lucky that the employer is prepared to find you anything else. Most wouldn't.
They are a complete shambles from the top down.We have managers
who want to have the Kudos of a Managerial title on their C.V. , can talk the right b*llsh*t buzzwords at interviews , and write the same cwap on their application forms yet when it comes down to the nitty gritty can do little and actually 'manage' !! They wouldn't last 5 mins in the private sector. Neither, it would appear, would you. You had your chance.
The internal offer wasn't and still isn't in writing (all verbal) .
We have been led to believe ,after declining other options, that
the new roles were available. I see. So let me get this straight. You declined keeping your existing jobs based on no confirmed offer of any alternative and no guarantees of alternative employment being available, in a period of savage and well-punlicised public sector cuts - and you think your managers are stupid, and the union as much use as a chocolate teapot? And you are doing so much better than them on your own, aren't you?
The new roles have been scaled back due to lack of proper planning by top management ...mostly how much it would cost to actually run the new dept !! It comes as a surprise to you to find out that public sector cuts are impacting on the ability of public services to create new jobs?
I can see what you are thinking but I am not like some dimwit off the Jeremy Kyle show. Contrary to the evidence thus far...
The team has not been given the best information from the start with what i would consider to be less than forthcoming communication as time has gone by.Again, you made decisions to refuse your own jobs based on little information and no communication - and you think it is everyone elses fault?
I am sorry, but Whilst I have some sympathy, it is wearing a little thin. No, you cannot be expected to know the in's and out's of employment law, but if you don't you can be expected to find out before you take actions and not afterwards. It seems that the situation you find yourself in is everyone's elses fault... Your managers who can't manage, the union that isn't worth joining, and the lawyer who can't help until the employer actually does something unlawful.
You cannot possibly be entirely oblvious to the fact that public sector organisations are shedding thousands of jobs in the face of massive public cuts, and it surely must have at least occurred to you that setting up a new department and recreating a whole load of new jobs on the terms that you wanted was, to say the least, a little unrealistic? So maybe you should have been a little more persistant in clarifying what alternatives were actually on the table, or not given up the jobs that you had already.
It seems that in your view, this is everyone's fault but yours. I think you will find that there are a lot of people, in public services and elsewhere, who are considering themselves pretty lucky to be holding on to their jobs right now. It must have occurred to you somewhere in this how unlikely it was that the employer would outsource the work and just recreate the jobs again internally?0 -
Q for the legal experts.
If the transfer has not happened yet can you withdraw the "I don't want to TUPE" like employers can with redundancy.0 -
The OP is a public sector worker, what else did you honestly expect?
As strange as it may sound...I'm here by circumstances rather than choice. A " needs must" type of circumstance.
and I'd rather work in the private sector. At least things get done.
Here , it can be !!!! all gets done , not at least until several meetings and copious amounts of outside catering have been scoffed.Am the proud holder of an Honours Degree
in tea-making.
Do people who keep giraffes have high overheads ?0 -
No - the OP has refused the suitable alternative employment. There is no second chance. Or not in law. the purpose of employment law is to keep people in employment where possible - hence an employer may rescind notice if they can do so, but employers move on if you refuse a job - they get someone else.getmore4less wrote: »Q for the legal experts.
If the transfer has not happened yet can you withdraw the "I don't want to TUPE" like employers can with redundancy.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.3K Spending & Discounts
- 247.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.4K Life & Family
- 261.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards