HR Help! Unfair contract change?

Blatchford

Knittybob wrote: »

It's not that it didn't 'suit me' - as I already mentioned, I was told that they would be encompassing the 10 hours into another admin role so there WAS a guarantee that I would have lost the job.

Not sure how I've 'burned bridges' as I currently work there in another role - as stated in my original post.
Not sure why the need to be quite so rude...

But you were the one who said that you had:

• resigned
• Said that you didn't want to go back and work there but didn't want them to get away with it

so it would be hard not to come to the conclusion that you had resigned and didn't want to work there anyway!

All that would certainly suggest burning your bridges. You made a whole lot of assumptions, there's no indication you ever discussed any of this with anyone except "someone" who got it all wrong anyway, and acted on those assumptions. Even if they were going to rationalise the job into another contract, it is perfectly possible to have a conversation about that without resigning. What message did resigning send them? And it's perfectly possible to not see this all some form of personal attack - which is what you did. What message will that send them?

You were impetuous, there were better ways to handle this, and saying so isn't a personal attack or being rude either.

What is it that you actually want then?

ohreally

Start at the beginning with some clarity if possible.

Marcon

I've never read such a confusing thread. Why not just delete it and start again?

Knittybob

Blatchford wrote: »

But you were the one who said that you had:

• resigned
• Said that you didn't want to go back and work there but didn't want them to get away with it

so it would be hard not to come to the conclusion that you had resigned and didn't want to work there anyway!

All that would certainly suggest burning your bridges. You made a whole lot of assumptions, there's no indication you ever discussed any of this with anyone except "someone" who got it all wrong anyway, and acted on those assumptions. Even if they were going to rationalise the job into another contract, it is perfectly possible to have a conversation about that without resigning. What message did resigning send them? And it's perfectly possible to not see this all some form of personal attack - which is what you did. What message will that send them?

You were impetuous, there were better ways to handle this, and saying so isn't a personal attack or being rude either.

What is it that you actually want then?

I never said that I didn't want to go back and work there...perhaps you should read before jumping in.
I didn't make any assumptions - they told me the role would be merged into someone else's role...
I'm not sure how you can't see that the way you respond can be considered rude.

All I wanted was some clarity on whether or not they can change a permanent contract to a temporary one without consultation, which someone has answered without being unpleasant.

Blatchford

Knittybob wrote: »

I never said that I didn't want to go back and work there...perhaps you should read before jumping in.
I didn't make any assumptions - they told me the role would be merged into someone else's role...
I'm not sure how you can't see that the way you respond can be considered rude.

All I wanted was some clarity on whether or not they can change a permanent contract to a temporary one without consultation, which someone has answered without being unpleasant.

I don't know why you haven't noticed, but nobody has understood you. You said that you had resigned and "Don't really want to tell them they have to let me work there again" - nowhere did you say that you still worked there (resigned kind of suggests that you don't); and "not wanting to tell them that they have to let you work there again" sort of suggests that ermmm, you don't want to work there again? I know I'm being utterly unreasonable in believing what your are actually saying, but there we go.

Unbelievably, perhaps to you, it would have been quite possible to salvage this situation and possibly keep the job. I could have told you how to possibly do that had you not resigned when there was no reason to resign. There was no reason to resign because nobody had, at that point in time, done anything at all wrong. You could have discussed it. There might have been a legal right to that job. Because unlike what everyone had said, I would have asked - had it not been for the fact that you resigned - how long you had already worked for that employer and the basis of that employment. Had you already been an employee for two years you might have been in a very different position. But you rushed to resign. You have rushed to twice have a go at me for taking you at your word.. I am not the one being unreasonable here - either on this thread or in their rush to resign. Of course, whether you learn anything from that is up to you.

lincroft1710

Knittybob wrote: »

To make it worse I felt really unwanted and rubbish about it so I have quit, but not sure if there's anything I can do about it now? Don't really want to tell them they have to let me work there again, but also don't want to let them get away with it?!

Any help greatly appreciated.

There is really nothing you can do. It was a new role, so presumably you were employed for much less than 2 yrs, so you basically have no employment rights. You decided to quit, so you have effectively closed any avenues for negotiation

Blatchford

lincroft1710 wrote: »

There is really nothing you can do. It was a new role, so presumably you were employed for much less than 2 yrs, so you basically have no employment rights. You decided to quit, so you have effectively closed any avenues for negotiation

Can I just be clear - because everyone is rushing to an assumption. It isn't a new employment, its a new role in what appears to be the same employment. Had the poster not rushed to resign, this might have been an unfair dismissal had the job just been taken away. They might have had the two years employment. But we will never know, and it won't be relevant anyway. They resigned.

Lomast

Knittybob wrote: »

I never said that I didn't want to go back and work there...perhaps you should read before jumping in.
I didn't make any assumptions - they told me the role would be merged into someone else's role...
I'm not sure how you can't see that the way you respond can be considered rude.

All I wanted was some clarity on whether or not they can change a permanent contract to a temporary one without consultation, which someone has answered without being unpleasant.

Umm that is exactly what you said in the first post that you have resigned if you have resigned then you no longer work there

Knittybob

Blatchford wrote: »

I don't know why you haven't noticed, but nobody has understood you. You said that you had resigned and "Don't really want to tell them they have to let me work there again" - nowhere did you say that you still worked there (resigned kind of suggests that you don't); and "not wanting to tell them that they have to let you work there again" sort of suggests that ermmm, you don't want to work there again? I know I'm being utterly unreasonable in believing what your are actually saying, but there we go.

Unbelievably, perhaps to you, it would have been quite possible to salvage this situation and possibly keep the job. I could have told you how to possibly do that had you not resigned when there was no reason to resign. There was no reason to resign because nobody had, at that point in time, done anything at all wrong. You could have discussed it. There might have been a legal right to that job. Because unlike what everyone had said, I would have asked - had it not been for the fact that you resigned - how long you had already worked for that employer and the basis of that employment. Had you already been an employee for two years you might have been in a very different position. But you rushed to resign. You have rushed to twice have a go at me for taking you at your word.. I am not the one being unreasonable here - either on this thread or in their rush to resign. Of course, whether you learn anything from that is up to you.

Hahaha. Oh dear.
Learn to read properly please. You clearly haven't understood. I feel as if you've created a whole different scenario when I was only asking one simple question. If anything was unclear you simply could have asked and I would have clarified. Instead you are rude.
I never said you were unreasonable. Just rude.
Maybe try to go outside, get some air.

lincroft1710

Blatchford wrote: »

Can I just be clear - because everyone is rushing to an assumption. It isn't a new employment, its a new role in what appears to be the same employment. Had the poster not rushed to resign, this might have been an unfair dismissal had the job just been taken away. They might have had the two years employment. But we will never know, and it won't be relevant anyway. They resigned.

I took the OP to mean they had one role of 100 hrs pa and then were offered an additional rather than different role