Pool Selection Question

sangie595

And that is exactly what I warned you that you cannot do. Not that you will listen, but for the benefit of others who might want to know...


Even IF the employer fails in some major degree (and there is nothing here to suggest that they have) you cannot sit around doing nothing at all about it at the time it happens, and then run of to a tribunal months later - when most of the incidents are probably out of time anyway. If you do that, then your chances of winning at tribunal become infinitely less likely. And since the employer almost certainly knows this, even if you don't, it provides you no leverage at all.


Oh, and an open ended, currently six months and counting, opportunity to jointly identify an alternative role is going to be seen as VERY generous of the employer by a tribunal. Definitely a big point in their favour over not offering feedback that wasn't asked for. And actually, since you aren't actually on notice, you don't have a right of appeal. The appeal is against redundancy - not failing to get a job. So you never had a right of appeal against the recruitment, unless the employers process allows for it. The law certainly doesn't.


Which is why, you see, that you don't get to decide who can post on a thread. If you want to only get answers you want, then read selectively - but other people deserve the opportunity to get the RIGHT answer, not the one you preferred.

uptomyeyeballs

Like I said, my conversation with you is over, sunshine.

For the benefit of everyone else, it makes perfect sense to keep a timeline of events, non-events, what was said, what wasn't said etc., just in case you need to refer to it later. It may be useful to you, it may not be, but just write everything down so that it can be referred to later.

My company has a policy document, part of the staff handbook, of how they handle potential redundancy situations. In my case they haven't followed their own policy, and that includes discussions about criteria and scoring. Whether that is relevant in law or not may be different to whether it is relevant in a negotiation of a compromise agreement. Not doing what you say you'll do is not good.

Which is why, you see, that I do actually get to decide whose input to my thread is valuable to me, and whose isn't. I don't care how clever you are trying to appear to everyone else. It's irrelevant.

sangie595

You do understand that this is a public forum, don't you? Because that was an awful long reply to a post by someone you aren't speaking to because they don't give you the answer that you want. As I said, I frankly don't care whether you listen or not. But I do care that other people don't believe that they can fail to raise questions or complain about things, and expect some time in the future to drag them up as somehow relevant months later.

uptomyeyeballs

That's exactly what I'm getting at, AndyBSG. There are sometimes much more subtle things you can do based on what may or may not have happened in the process along the way. Some people may need to negotiate settlements and any chink in the armour may become a negotiation point later. It may be that way for me, as there are other bits of policy that have apparently been ignored in this case. I'm well aware that personally I haven't yet received notice yet, but that doesn't stop me looking out for myself in the meantime.

engineer_amy

uptomyeyeballs wrote: »

Sorry sangie595, my conversation with you is done.

Smells like the OP came on here with his mind already made up as to what he was going to do, just looking for other people to justify/validate his opinion before going further, and then takes the huff when other posters on the public forum (with very probably a lot more knowledge in these areas) don't agree with him.
Seriously, take the advice you are being given.

junkyarddog

Looks to me like OP asked a reasonable question but got jumped on for some reason. He didn't say anything about going to a tribunal, the scores of anyone else or appear to be evasive in any way. He is clearly confused by the situation of being not-quite-redundant and as has been said, can't question or appeal some of the things until he actually gets his notice. He says the company haven't even followed their own policies, which is a bit worrying in his circumstances. How common is this approach to redundancy? 6 months is a long time to not know your future.

lovinituk

uptomyeyeballs wrote: »

Sorry sangie595, my conversation with you is done.

uptomyeyeballs wrote: »

Like I said, my conversation with you is over, sunshine.

I'm starting to see why the employer wouldn't want to retain the OP!

uptomyeyeballs

junkyarddog wrote: »

Looks to me like OP asked a reasonable question but got jumped on for some reason. He didn't say anything about going to a tribunal, the scores of anyone else or appear to be evasive in any way. He is clearly confused by the situation of being not-quite-redundant and as has been said, can't question or appeal some of the things until he actually gets his notice. He says the company haven't even followed their own policies, which is a bit worrying in his circumstances. How common is this approach to redundancy? 6 months is a long time to not know your future.

Thank you.

sangie595

junkyarddog wrote: »

Looks to me like OP asked a reasonable question but got jumped on for some reason. He didn't say anything about going to a tribunal, the scores of anyone else or appear to be evasive in any way. He is clearly confused by the situation of being not-quite-redundant and as has been said, can't question or appeal some of the things until he actually gets his notice. He says the company haven't even followed their own policies, which is a bit worrying in his circumstances. How common is this approach to redundancy? 6 months is a long time to not know your future.

The OP was only "jumped on" in their version. The OP asked "what are the implications for the employer of not revealing/discussing criteria and scores with the employees involved, especially the ones selected for redundancy" and the answer was given - it depends on the exact situation. The OP gave some of the information asked for - they didn't ask for the scores even though they could have; and they didn't appeal, even though they could have; and the OP is "sitting on these things" until some future date when they decide to want to act on them, which means they are too late to complain. And if you have no case in law, then you have nothing at all to hold over an employer. Employers do not care about "gripes", they only care about what it is going to cost them at a tribunal. One is going to get nowhere having a hissy fit about what they maybe should have done months ago but which one didn't bother to complain about at the time.

The OP can challenge or question anything they like - it is not dependant on having been served notice. You challenge or appeal something when it happens - not some considerable time later.

Like it or not, the OP got the advice they asked for. And there are a good many people who have six or more months of potential impending redundancy. It is far from uncommon.

junkyarddog

sangie595 wrote: »

The OP was only "jumped on" in their version.

Apparently not. As valuable as your advice is, as a 3rd party, I can see why the OP might object to your style. It isn't at all friendly. They've been on these forums for 9 years versus your 5 months. Perhaps they deserve a little more respect?