Slotted in to new structure

Ms_Brush

Hi all
I guess this might sound incredibly ungrateful under the circumstances.

I work for the NHS in an arms length body that has been going through a pretty badly handled change process that will culminate with a lot of either voluntary / compulsory redundancies. This has been going on since the first Voluntary scheme opened in February, consultation ran from march till end June and the Outcomes are just coming through now. I have been slotted in to a role, which on the surface is a suitable alternative, as it is the same level, pay and location as my former role. The trouble is, I wasn't working to that JD, which we couldn't change because of the ongoing move to a national structure, and I wasn't able to change to a different location for the same reason, yet I am under occupational health for an ongoing shoulder injury which is not healing because of driving (my base is 45 miles from home) and the area I cover has been substantially increased in the new role, and there is an expectation that we will need to travel to see the stakeholders in my area. I live in mid Essex, and the area I will be covering is Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire, Milton Keynes, Northamptonshire, Leicestershire and Lincolnshire. There are no direct or easy public transport routes and the only real option is to drive, hence my issue - I am in pain quite a lot despite currently
working from home once a week and the physiotherapy and I am devastated as the challenge we were allowed under the process has been ignored and it seems I have no further options but to either resign or put up with it - neither of which are an option from my perspective. I would happily leave under a voluntary agreement but as I have been slotted in, this option is not available. Yet some of my colleagues who are desperate to stay are still at risk of redundancy.

I have completely lost trust in the organisation as they have behaved in complete contradiction of the published organisation values, so not expecting any level of reasonable discussion about this and I am not a union member. What do I do?

sangie595

I'm afraid that there is nothing that you can do. Redundancy is not a choice - it is an unavoidable consequence. In your case it is not unavoidable and you are not allowed to say that being made redundant is a "reasonable adjustment". So yes, I am afraid that if your want the employer to consider adjustments (assuming this qualifies as a disability) then you must do so AFTER accepting the job. Otherwise, you are resigning by refusing it.


Had you been in a union that wouldn't have changed this, but they might have been able to swing it. But they have no interest in representing a non-member.


FYI they are indeed operating within their values - unless one of those values is to break the law. Just because they are not giving you what you want does not mean that they are wrong. I'm afraid in this case, it is you who are wrong, not them. If you are the slot in, in accordance with their redundancy policy, then that is what it is.

Manxman_in_exile

Hmmmm. I agree with Sangie's advice but...


I once worked for an "arm's length" organisation in the NHS about 17 years ago. Owing to a national re-structuring the host NHS trust and base location were moved about 80 miles away. My colleagues were happy to accept this but I wasn't. After a great deal of argument (I could be quite awkward) the employing authority accepted thet they were making me redundant. I then redeployed to another position in the original host trust.


You say that "on the face of it" the new role is a suitable alternative. Is it or isn't it? If you are covering a much wider area to visit stakeholders, it may not be.


Please note, I'm not suggesting that my experience 17 years ago would be replicated today. I didn't want to be made redundant and I was more than confident that my host trust would be able to re-deploy me. So were my employers, so they were pretty certain they wouldn't have any redundancy costs to pay.


That's my personal experience. But I'm sure you're better advised to listen to Sangie. unless you're game for a long and stressful fight which you'll probably lose.

sangie595

Manxman_in_exile wrote: »

Hmmmm. I agree with Sangie's advice but...


I once worked for an "arm's length" organisation in the NHS about 17 years ago. Owing to a national re-structuring the host NHS trust and base location were moved about 80 miles away. My colleagues were happy to accept this but I wasn't. After a great deal of argument (I could be quite awkward) the employing authority accepted thet they were making me redundant. I then redeployed to another position in the original host trust.


You say that "on the face of it" the new role is a suitable alternative. Is it or isn't it? If you are covering a much wider area to visit stakeholders, it may not be.


Please note, I'm not suggesting that my experience 17 years ago would be replicated today. I didn't want to be made redundant and I was more than confident that my host trust would be able to re-deploy me. So were my employers, so they were pretty certain they wouldn't have any redundancy costs to pay.


That's my personal experience. But I'm sure you're better advised to listen to Sangie. unless you're game for a long and stressful fight which you'll probably lose.

I think that is fair comment. There is a difference between what the law says and what an employer might do. Unfortunately you are also correct. Things have changed. Here the OP wants to leave, and I suspect the employer also knows that. So we have a opportunity to get two for the price of one. The OP stays and gets no redundancy. Or goes and gets no redundancy and someone else gets the job so that's two redundancies saved. Sounds like awful employers? Welcome to the new face of the public sector. For years people have been slaying the sector for being soft employers - and although there were things that could have been done better, in general that wasn't true. But the one thing they didn't generally have was a money motivator. They could afford not to be driven to poor practice by money because they didn't make profits. Now they must be driven by money, and many are becoming ruthless.

Ms_Brush

Thanks all, that is what I was expecting to be honest. I spoke to ACAS, and an HR qualified former colleague who said much the same thing.

On the up-side, now I need to get my head 'back in the game'. There are some positive answers coming from the new director (for now), so it may be better than feared. Let's see.