We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 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!

How important is your job description in consultation meetings?

Options
As the handle suggest, I'm not completely new round here.

Long story short, I have just had the proverbial 'tap on the shoulder'. In the meeting, and on the documentation I received, my job description was not defined correctly - strictly speaking it was half correct, let's say my role is 'head of x and y' (and this is documented in organisation charts etc) however they only included 'head of x'.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not grasping at straws here and frankly a few months tending the garden would not be the worst thing. But is this a legitimate situation where they are not consulting properly because they are only suggesting that half of my current role is no longer needed? If so, do I call them out on it at some point and they have to restart the process?

For what it's worth, this is a major global corporation and there would be a settlement agreement involved at the end.

Cheers

Comments

  • getmore4less
    getmore4less Posts: 46,882 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper I've helped Parliament
    I suspect all they have to do is say sorry and change the title and carry on.

    Consultation is a two way process to see if there are ways to reduce the impact of the redundancy or eliminate it

    If you don't consult on ALL aspects of your role from the start that's as much your problem as theirs.
  • Notnewnotold
    Notnewnotold Posts: 116 Forumite
    Fifth Anniversary 100 Posts Combo Breaker
    You may well be right, but part of what prompted the question was that I've had to deliver consultation messages in the past, and HR have always been very precise in getting the individuals job descriptions correct. May well be a case of it being out of respect and courtesy, but when the wording of the letter is along the lines of 'we do not believe that there will be a need for a head of x' then it does beg the question about the need for a continuing need for 'head of y' as it is not mentioned.

    I'll be getting legal advice in due course anyway, was more a point of initial curiosity...
  • getmore4less
    getmore4less Posts: 46,882 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper I've helped Parliament
    Just being in the role that is redundant does not automaticaly mean you are redundant.

    It could just be that y is still needed but you won't be doing it anymore.

    Is the use of X only in the context of it being no longer needed or as your job description
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 350.9K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.5K Spending & Discounts
  • 243.9K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 598.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 176.9K Life & Family
  • 257.1K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.