Refusing alternative employment after trial period

Newbeginning

Hi there

Hoping someone may be able to help with this query.

I was made redundant from my old post in June and am currently taking part in a 3 month trial period in a new role within the company. I am not enjoying the new job and would prefer to be made redundant rather than be made permanent here. I cannot afford to do that though if it means losing my redundancy settlement.

When I agreed to take part in this three month trial I was told it was being put in place because the new job is very different to my old job, however, this was on the telephone so I do not have this statement in writing. The trial was sold to me on this basis, I think because I didn't perform too well in the interview for this job and my new manager had reservations and wanted a getout clause if need be.

The working hours are around two hours per week longer in my new job and involve starting earlier on two days per week. There is also less flexibility and more occasional evening and weekend commitments (unpaid) than in my previous role. But the main reason that I am not too happy is because I work in publishing and I have gone from writing about a subject I found quite interesting to writing about a subject I find very dull.

In the redeployment letter it says that at the end of the three month trial one or both parties can decide the job/candidate is inappropriate for their needs. Is it likely that I can turn down the job based on the reasons listed above and still get redundancy? I am very nervous about having the conversation because I don't really understand what my rights are. As I have said the hours are longer for the same pay but only 2-2.5 hours per week so I don't know if I would be able to use this argument or not.

Hope this all makes sense.

getmore4less

Potential suitable alternative trials are normaly 4 weeks.

AIUI(reading previous posts) exteded trials need good reasons like training.

I think you need to establish that this is an extended trial period for a potentialy suitable alternative.

I thnk that protects the redundancy should it not be suitable otherise it is just another job.

A key point about trials is the point of auto acceptance of the alternative is the end of the trial period, so once beyond that AIUI redundancy could be refused so you need to reject BEFORE the end of the trial

You should also consider raising the issue now and not wait o long.

I also think you need to focus on the job related points and the ability to do a high quality job, I guess writers(unless known specialist) are expected to turn their hand to anything.

three month trial I was told it was being put in place because the new job is very different to my old job
.........
I think because I didn't perform too well in the interview for this job and my new manager had reservations and wanted a getout clause if need be.

Might be worth raising the issue with the boss on a "is this working" kind of way( had any reviews?), expresing concern over your performance and suitability for the roll. Finding the writing dull won't be sufficient unless ia key perfomance criteria is enthusiasm

Check out job/person descriptions and recruiment criteria.

Problem is if you are doing a good job even though you don't actualy like it(lots of jobs are like that) makes it your problem not theirs.

If they are happy then they might actualy want to keep you.

The secondary issues as described(IMO) are supporters but on their own not stong enough to make the roll unsuitable.

Newbeginning

Thanks you very much for your reply.

I saw HR this morning and the person I saw didn't really know the answer to my question about turning the job down over not enjoying the difference in subject matter and so they are going to check. I basically have until the end of the week to sort this out one way or another as my manager is away next week.

In the redundancy literature we were originally given it said that the company would look to find suitable alternative employment and that it reserved the right to decide what was a suitable alternative. However, it then went onto say that if the new job is very different, a three-month trial would be put in place. However, I guess different doesn't necessarily mean "unsuitable" or "inappropriate"?.

I will try and sit down with my boss before the end of the week and express the reservations I have about the role, I'm not sure they want someone to stay whose heart is not in it, however, I will find out I guess!

What I would prefer is to go down to 3 days a week which would give me 2 days a week to freelance and do other things, possibly retrain. I could definitely deal with the boredom aspect if I could cut my hours down. I just can't see them going for this as the team is quite skeletal and it is a real problem when people are out of the office for whatever reason.

Edit: Ok, HR say not enjoying job is not grounds for turning it down and that the jobs are basically the same. Have asked for clarification on why I was put on a 3 month trial rather than being transferred with the statutory four weeks (as other people that were also made redundant at the same time did not have to have a trial period in their new role), not that I am expecting it to make any difference but I would like to find out.

Newbeginning

HR replied to me (finally) today to say that all redeployees are put on a 3 month trial as part of company policy. This is 100% not true as others were redeployed at the same time as me and were definitely not put on 3 month trials. I know because I keep in touch with some and they have double checked for me.

They said the trial was as a safeguard in case the job did turn out to be "drastically different" - I can't see how it could have ever "turned out" to be drastically different - someone was doing the job before me, this is not a new role that was created.

Also, I used to get annual pay increases in my last role. I am now being told that these are not guaranteed. I need to double check my original contact as I was TUPE'd over from another company, but I was under the impression these were annual cost of living increases and I have had one every year for the past four years - except in the year I was promoted. So there has never been a year when I have not received a pay increase. I have been told to speak to my line manager about this, but he is off until Wednesday, so where does that leave me, given that my trial ends tomorrow?

I don't know where I stand with any of the above. I can't get the correct information out of HR, the trial period ends tomorrow, I am working longer hours and possibly not getting the annual pay increase that I have always had.