Unfair redundancy?

Buyingloco

Hi all,

I will try to keep this brief but add as much detail as possible. 

I work as an admin assistant. The company I work for has issued notice of redundancy. They have Put the blame on Covid, but actually started the process before the outbreak, which I have evidence of, due to meetings and emails etc. 

Within the company there are three people who are in my post, and we have been told the post is no longer needed. It is being centralised and digitised and we are surplus to requirements. They have been holding zoom meetings to consult with us individually and go over the process as we are still furloughed, however it has come to light that of the three of us in the post, only two of us are actually at risk. The third person has had a new role created for them which they have not had to apply for, and we were not given the option to apply for, meaning only two of us are being dismissed. The other person happens to be my fiancé. We are a gay couple. 

We put our concerns to our area manager who said they would get back to us with answers about our concerns, and despite repeated contact we have so far heard nothing. The end of the consultation process is today, and he finally emailed about an hour ago with some vague responses, but I can’t help feeling he has left it to the very last minute, given that we now only have just over two hours to raise our concerns with the consultation committee. 

He has completely swerved explaining why the other employee has been given a new role and doesn’t face redundancy, and has said that new jobs may arise for us, but unlike the other employee, these would be open to everyone and we would have to apply for them. However, these roles are not open for application yet and will be internal only, so unless they post them and we apply before the end of the consultation process in two hours at midday, we would become external candidates and not able to apply. 

Something about it all just seems really off and it feels like we are being shafted a bit with the process. My partner and I both have an exemplary record, and we don’t work in the same buildings so there’s no issues regarding us working together, even though our role is the same. 

I’m not sure there’s any more information needed or that I’ve missed but please ask for more details if you need it. Are we being unfairly/constructively dismissed?

lincroft1710

The obvious question comes to mind - does your fiance have skills/knowledge/experience that will be useful/necessary in the new role, which you or your other colleague lack.

Buyingloco

lincroft1710 said:

The obvious question comes to mind - does your fiance have skills/knowledge/experience that will be useful/necessary in the new role, which you or your other colleague lack.

Sorry, I’ve re-read what I’ve written and I perhaps should have been clearer. My partner is the other one being made redundant. The colleague they are keeping is the one with no connection to me. 

The one they are keeping has no extra experience or skills. In fact, of the three I am the one with the most experience and qualifications, and my partner has been there the longest, but of the three it is me and my partner who are being made redundant while our colleague gets a new post and gets to keep their job. 

Elmer_BeFuddled

Why mention sexuality??

Or is that your cunning plan?

gwynlas

To Elmer It is important to mention sexuality as it might well be grounds for discrimination so try not to be flippant on serious matters. 
Buyingloco. Are you in a union? If not why not? You and your fiancee might well have been discrimated against and both be out of a job by now. It is prohibitively expensive to take legal advice and challenge dismissal through redundancy as much as you would like to. Have you managed to secure a decent redundancy package? 
If you worked for a company with decent credentials check if tthere is any mileage in using their grievance prod=cedure over the issue that meetings could have been face to face with representation and third person not affected.

Mickey666

"The third person has had a new role created for them which they have not had to apply for, and we were not given the option to apply for, meaning only two of us are being dismissed. "

What is the 'new role'?  Is the 3rd person more suited to that role than the two people being made redundant?

Basically, there are no rules about how a company decides to organise itself.  Imagine the problems if there were.  So, this company has decided to make three positions redundant (remember - JOBS are made redundant, not PEOPLE).  It has also decided to create a new job, which it is perfectly entitled to do.  It doesn't even need to make sense, because the company can create whatever role it likes.  

So, it now has one new role and three employees for which it has no role and it's reasonable for the company to decide which employee is best suited to the new role.   Typically, this would be by inviting the three employees to apply for the new role.  However, if the new role is clearly only suited to one of the employees then what would be the point of inviting the other two to apply?

Of course, we all know some employers play all sorts of games around such things and that in many cases the company decides who they want to get rid of and who they want to keep - but unless such a thing can be proved then it's a waste of time pursuing it.  I've no idea what the true motivations of the company might be but my scenario above is a valid reason for the actions described by the OP and could easily be used as a defence should the OP decide to go to an employment tribunal for unfair dismissal.  But a tribunal cannot tell a company how to organise its business so any arguments along those libes are doomed to fail.  As an extreme example, suppose the 3rd person has a degree in a particular subject and the newly created role is defined as requiring someone with such a qualification.  Remember, the tribunal can't decide what qualifications are required, only the company can do that.  Thus, if the two other employees are not suitably qualified for the new role, then there's no point in inviting them for an interview.  So they no longer fit any of the available jobs in the company, so they can be dismissed on the gronds of redundancy.

It's tough, but it's how it works in practice.