Workplace discrimination?

Timpu

grogers234 wrote: »

(1) In my 6 years at the Bank I have not known any other manager / employee to be moved because they are under performing - under performers are performance managed and given the usual verbal/written and final warnings.

(2) It has taken me many years to get my branch to meet the monthly targets expected of me, the under performing manager is moving in to a 'ready made / problem free' branch whilst I simply inherit the problem he caused/was unable to solve.

(3) I am worried that I am being set up to fail before even starting (the current manager supposedly unable to turn things around, why am I being expected to when we are the same level).

(4) The under performing manager will be closer to his home town whilst I will be traveling farther away. I estimate the additional travel costs over and above my current costs to be £2,050 more.

1. There may be mitigating circumstances that you're not aware of and your bosses will have a good reason for the decision made.

2. You 'inherit' a problem??? Given your track record I'd see this as a huge opportunity (as others have said) to make improvements. There may be some basics missing you can put in place and take all the credit for. Happy days.

3. Bosses have seen you meet targets and trust you can do the same again. You could ask your boss about what additional support you'll receive to help be successful in the new role. This is your chance to take control.

4. Ask for the costs to be covered and ask for a pay rise given what you're undertaking. Again, take control and make this opportunity work in your favour.

IMHO not discrimination, rather you're being favoured having proved yourself before. From the tone of the OP, is there any evidence to suggest your bosses want to get rid of you? Btw, please stop worrying about the other person, they are not your concern.

Takeaway_Addict

grogers234 wrote: »

Hello,

I am currently working as a branch manager in one of the high street Banks and have been for 6 years now.

I have recently been told by the area manager that I have to swap branches with a manager that is currently under performing in a branch that is consequentially under performing. The area manager told me that he needs a manager of my level (same level as the under performing manager) to move to their branch and turn it around.

I feel as though I am being discriminated against for the following reasons:

(1) In my 6 years at the Bank I have not known any other manager / employee to be moved because they are under performing - under performers are performance managed and given the usual verbal/written and final warnings.

(2) It has taken me many years to get my branch to meet the monthly targets expected of me, the under performing manager is moving in to a 'ready made / problem free' branch whilst I simply inherit the problem he caused/was unable to solve.

(3) I am worried that I am being set up to fail before even starting (the current manager supposedly unable to turn things around, why am I being expected to when we are the same level).

(4) The under performing manager will be closer to his home town whilst I will be traveling farther away. I estimate the additional travel costs over and above my current costs to be £2,050 more.

Could somebody who has experience in employment/HR or a similar situation advise on whether this is work place discrimination/favoritism?

Many thanks
Graham

Should you not have a basic understanding of employment law being a manager?

As others have said it should be seen as praise rather than looking for the negatives.

Negotiate your costs covered and your bonus based on a different set of targets, with possibly a 1 year guarantee based on this last year?

piglet25

I would ask for written confirmation that you will not be made redundant if this branch is doomed to fail and closed down too

shopbot

It's not discrimination.

Put it this way - would you prefer to be the other guy?

This falls under 'Needs of the business'. If your branch is running well then they can put him there and give him the chance to improve his performance. At the same time you can support and improve an 'at risk' branch. This is common in retail. There is likely a clause in your contract saying they can move you to another branch within reasonable travelling time.

In all likelihood they will cover your additional travel costs if it's not a permanent move.

daytona0

In terms of the other manager:

1. He might improve given the opportunity to work in a branch which is performing well.

2. Managers are a bit harder to shift than their fellow lower wage grinders (cashiers). You start putting them on warnings and stuff and you may find that suddenly the branch nosedives, leaving bosses with the task of training another person up and making a sacking etc. You're effectively undermining the manager.

3. He is being handed the rope with this move. If the branch goes from good to bad then it is going to be hard NOT pinning the blame on the manager, at which point he is going to feel the burn big time.

So if anything it is the other manager who is likely being 'discriminated' against (read: being handed the rope).