Secret redundency but no job at risk - is this right?

ElsieMonkey

[FONT=&quot]error 101[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I have no experience of redundancy but this just isn’t sitting right with me. Do I have reason to be annoyed? What would you think/feel/do?[/FONT]

getmore4less

ElsieMonkey wrote: »

I work in a very large organisation consisting of many different departments. It was announced recently that a department (not mine) will be going through a restructure. We were told this would not impact our office at all – all our jobs and existing structure is safe and not to be changed. We were simply just being updated about this other department, that falls under the same directorate, but is a completely separate office. What happens in this office has no relation to what happens in ours.

One of my direct colleagues in my office was planning on handing her notice in the end of this year. However, she has now gone to speak to the powers that be and asked for redundancy, and they have granted it. They have granted it despite her job not being at risk at all (I’m certain that they have seen it as a quick and easy way to get rid of her, since she has always been difficult and very unreliable, always calling in sick and not contributing much except moaning when she is here).

She has begged me not to say anything to anyone else in the office that she has been given redundancy, because if others find out she said the redundancy money may be taken away from her. The powers that be told her that they don’t want others finding out otherwise they would have to offer it to all and then the floodgates may open!

I feel really angry by this. Am I right to? These are my reasons:
· She has always taken the p**s to put it bluntly (excessive sick leave, unreliable, lying to get out of work, uncooperative and disruptive when she is here) and has always gotten away with it because the powers that be just want a quiet life. She has always received preferential treatment way and above others.
· Their decision to grant immediate redundancy at her request has left me high and dry – there were only 2 of us in our team (we were understaffed), and now I am alone!
· There is no valid reason for her asking for redundency, and them giving her redundancy, her job was categorically not at risk, the restructure of jobs and structure is not happening in our office at all and there’s no plans to either. She could have just handed her notice in like normal, and like anyone else will be expected to, if she wants to leave.
· The fact that this has to stay a secret – she’s getting preferential treatment yet again. I strongly feel that if this is an option to her, it should be an option to us all in order for everyone to be treated fairly.

That all being said, of course I don’t necessarily blame her, she has taken what she could and ran with it and I’m sure most would in the same situation.

I have no experience of redundancy but this just isn’t sitting right with me. Do I have reason to be annoyed? What would you think/feel/do?

smart move on her part and the company, means they can now save a job as they have a vacancy they can try and fill from the pool that will be effected.

Mutually agreed terminations can be done on any terms and is common in voluntary redundancy situations(which are not really redundancies).

There is no requirement to offer this to anyone else.

if you want to leave ask.


Bit silly telling you so you blurt it all over the internet.

ElsieMonkey

getmore4less wrote: »

Bit silly telling you so you blurt it all over the internet.

Not really. I've hardly given away company or employee name here!

zaax

I know these things can give sleepless nights, but I wouldn't worry unless there are other pointers. Just enjoy her leaving do if there is one.

RichardD1970

Surely this is a good thing for all those involved.

The company now don't have to make as many people redundant so someone how would have been forced out will get to keep their job and you lose a PIA colleague and they get to leave with a little bit extra.

pete-20-11

I've heard of that in the public sector, some time ago though.

I think it was something along the lines of - if there is someone at risk who could do the other persons job, then they can consider making the other person redundant.

getmore4less

Known as bumping

when jobs go there is no requirement that it is the people doing the jobs.

TELLIT01

Surely a win-win situation. The company has got rid of somebody who you view as being difficult and unreliable, and for you a person who was not contributing to your team has gone. It may also save somebody's job at the other location.