Constructive dismissal case or no?

Undervalued

ArseandElbow wrote: »

Well I accepted that there may be a difference in salary and to be honest I was accepting of that. Oh just realised now I'm slightly more calm (ish!) that' the salary is nearly 50% more than mine.


Well if they think he was better for the job surely I shouldn't be training him?

I understand your frustration but nothing you have posted here suggests they are doing anything unlawful.

Regarding training the new person, whilst your remain employed you need to carry out whatever lawful duties your employer asks of you. Obviously you can resign sooner by giving your contractual notice (or one week if it is not specified). You won't then have to train the new person after that but won't get any redundancy money either.

ArseandElbow

It's a catch 22, one of the other staff who's replacement started is on a 13% higher wage.

Another who we waiting on a replacement was initially told their salary in new office would be less then they retracted that and said same.

It'll be the same across the board we all know that. It's definitely not a money savings exercise as the office moved here 30 years ago for that reason.

New Management over last few years for you ��

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

stator wrote: »

Well it's certainly incompetant of them but luckily for most firms incompetance isn't illegal.

I would certainly let them know that you know about the higher salary and think it was silly of them not to offer it to you. Since they are making you redundant they could have saved quite a few thousand pounds.

It might be entirely competent of them. There's no reason to suppose they don't know exactly what they are doing and are doing it deliberately.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

ArseandElbow wrote: »

it's 200 miles away, so no way of commuting.


Still nice to know they value me ha ha.

Well, there's your answer. They don't value you. At all. There's nothing odd or unusual about this at all, except your surprise.

They are glad to see you go. We can't tell you why this is, but it's obvious.

getmore4less

moving to a cheap are can be counter productive as it become more difficult to attract the best talent that want to be where the jobs are.

even though hte move may have been on the same salary your job opportunities may have improved

If you have been put on notice you could look at counternotice.

FBaby

Maybe they got a bad shock and only got one employable person applying to the job worth interviewing, and that person is much more qualified and said they would only take the job if paid 30% more. You are training him because they want to make full use of your time, maybe he thinks it's a waste of time too.

Also, how do you know what he is being paid. You thought it was 30%, now you think it's 50%, so clearly you didn't see it or heard it black and white. Rumours?

ArseandElbow

was black and white, I misread it when I found out, I guess wasn't expecting that much of a difference.


As for being glad to see me go? I've held this section together when we lost a few members of staff to outside companies. As I said I had the best review in my career here before all this was announced by my line managers.


As for more experienced, nope same type of experience, however in this current role there's no-one else in the company that could take over from me, they are reliant on me to pass over the information. As I said it's not just me they've shutting an office with upto 30+ years of experience and replacing with the longest serving employee being here 3 years.

Undervalued

ArseandElbow wrote: »

was black and white, I misread it when I found out, I guess wasn't expecting that much of a difference.


As for being glad to see me go? I've held this section together when we lost a few members of staff to outside companies. As I said I had the best review in my career here before all this was announced by my line managers.


As for more experienced, nope same type of experience, however in this current role there's no-one else in the company that could take over from me, they are reliant on me to pass over the information. As I said it's not just me they've shutting an office with upto 30+ years of experience and replacing with the longest serving employee being here 3 years.

You may well be right and they may be making a terrible mistake. However, providing they meet their statutory obligations they are quite entitled to do this.

pjcox2005

I would suggest not taking it personally.


If the company has chosen to relocate then their automatic position would be to keep salary for all staff the same otherwise they'd be hit with a significant wage increase if they conceded to your request, as others would follow.

It's effectively cheaper for them to accept that some won't relocate and they may have to hire externally at higher salaries for one or two positions. Those one or two higher salaries are cheaper than raising all salaries to keep existing staff I would expect. I very much doubt it reflects the quality of your work or past experience, purely a calculation of what is economically best for a company as the simple fact is that very few people are irreplaceable.

theronstar

I agree with the others that you will likely have to accept the situation and move on.

Generally speaking, are you aware of ACAS?

1) Constructive dismissal is when you feel forced out of your job. E.g. You allege that you have been constructively dismissed and resign very quickly.

If you remain in your role, continuing to perform your duties after your employers alleged breach, it becomes more difficult to say that you were constructively dismissed.

2) Unfair dismissal would be claimed in relation to redundancy terms an employee found unreasonable.

3) I am wondering if your employer could get in trouble with the tax authorities for your redundancy payment. The firm still needs your 'role' so it is arguable that your role is not actually redundant.

4) Have you read your job contract carefully?

Your employer does not have to offer you any compensation for the relocation but your contract may address the relocation scenario in express terms.

I would be curious as to what it says - if it says anything. In the event that it did, then you can hold your employer to those terms.