Forced into New Role Without Trial Period

richardh1970

sangie595 wrote: »

44 years a union member, and there were IT people in our union the whole time. So toy couldn't have looked hard!

I never looked at all, it's a cultural thing, I've worked alongside hundreds of similar staff and unions were never mentioned and always viewed as something that 'never happens here'. As I said, I might look into that for the future.

sangie595 wrote: »

...if the employer identifies a position as a suitable alternative, which appears to be the case here, there is no right to a trial period

I'm having trouble reconciling that with the text of s138. The whole point of the trial period is to answer the question of suitability where the new and old terms differ.

Can anyone recommend an employment lawyer in Beds/Bucks?

Annisele

I'm not a lawyer, so don't rely on this. But I don't see that s138 necessarily comes into this at all.


It sounds like your employer's position is that the "new" job is the same as your current one - i.e. there's been no substantial change. If your employer is correct, then there's been no change to your job, and no dismissal by reason of redundancy (or for any other reason). You're no more entitled to a trial period than you were last year, because there's nothing to trial - there haven't been any changes.

If you're correct, and there is a change, and the change is big enough for "new job" not to count as a "suitable alternative" to the old one, and you resign within 4 weeks of the change - then I think you might be able to claim that you were made redundant. But as sangie595 says, that's a risky move!

richardh1970

Sorry for the slow reply - I've been away.

I am now in touch with a solicitor; so I should probably stop posting to this public forum and make the most of the advice available from them.

I remain very grateful for all the help that has been offered, it has been very useful and interesting.

Thanks again.