Redundancy pool

nlolamil

Within my team of 6 all of us were employed to do the same role and have the same contract. However, I tend do focus on one aspect of the role and the others deal with the rest. At busy periods the others support me and vice versa.

We were told our jobs are at risk. However my 5 colleagues have been put in a redudancy pool and can either take voluntary redudancy or apply for what is now two remaining jobs. I was told that while my job is at risk they are moving me to the new team to do the role I do for the majority of the time. I can either accept the new role (without the need to apply for it) or leave without redudancy. 

Can anyone confirm if this is legal? All of us are employed to do the same job and while I do tend to do one aspect more than others they do cover me when it’s busy / I’m on holiday and I in turn support their work when needed. In the new team structure this will continue to be the case so I’ll need to cover both roles and whoever gets the remaining jobs will need to support in my role as and when needed. 

I’ve worked at the company for a long time and the redudancy package is very generous so if I had the chance I think I would have taken voluntary redudancy. Of my colleagues in the redudancy pool a couple have worked at the company longer than me and have jumped at the chance of redudancy. 

I have queried this with a senior manager at work but only got a very vague response. My immediate manager, whose role is safe, and was not involved in deciding the redundancy pool was surprised I wasn’t in the pool for redundancy and is aware it’s something I would have seriously thought about. 

elsien

It’s up to them what redundancy criteria they use. If they feel that your  more usual role is more important than the others then that can form part of their selection criteria. 

Brie

A pool of 6 is, I believe, less than normally needs to be dealt with by strict redundancy rules.  Doesn't mean you should just accept that you are being treated differently in it if you have good cause to consider yourself in the same role as the others.

I know in some circumstances there will be colleagues who are all "clerks" but some are graded within the clerk role.  If there was a group of 6 clerks all meant to be sending out letters but only 5 of them had been approved as fully trained and 1 not then they might be treated differently.  Also assuming that any of the 5 could easily do or pick up the work that the 1 does but not the other way around then there is good cause to separate the 2 different types when looking at redundancy.  Sorry - this is sounding very simplistic but only so I can try to explain myself.  

Another way you might look at it is that they actually value you more than the other 5 and don't want to lose your knowledge and experience.

Sometimes these things feel very personal.  I was made redundant 2 years back and despite being the same grade as the others in the department was not given the option of redeployment.  What had been determined is that despite being very good at what I did they no longer needed me to do it.  I could have been retrained to do the other things but they already had too many people doing that stuff.  So the easiest option, but badly worded, was that my job and the work that I did was no longer necessary or otherwise could be picked up quickly by anyone else.  Once the sting of this comment faded I remembered that frankly I was really quite pleased to be leaving.  So I guess you need to decide whether you want to stay, in a different team, or not stay and fight for a redundancy payout.  

Without knowing all the details of your situation it may help if you read through a bit of this below and then come back with more questions.....
Redundancy: your rights: Being selected for redundancy - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

Vitor

Unfortunately the OP is doing too good a job, which is by he's been given Hobson's choice. 

>Can anyone confirm if this is legal?<

Probably sailing close to the wind, there should be a job description for the two remaining roles and HR should have an explanation of how you've been role-matched to one of them (i.e. > 70% match of capabilities) but your 5 colleagues have not been matched and need to apply or take the package.

LinLui

You have a fundamental and very simple problem. Your right is to not be made redundant unless there is no other choice. So you can't complain that you want to be made redundant or put into the pool to be made redundant. Your colleagues can complain that you haven't been put in the pool - you can't! Of course,  that may not be in their own interests. It could mean that someone else who wants to be made redundant isn't made redundant, or that someone who wants to keep their job can't. 

nlolamil

Thanks everyone for your replies. 

It sounds very much like unless one of my colleagues in the redudancy pool complains that I’m not included in it that I have to accept the outcome. 

I know one colleague did question with a senior manager why I wasn’t included and she told me she got a vague response not answering the question. She is taking redudancy so didn’t want to ask more as she’s happy to leave and was concerned how it would affect others.

Hoenir

nlolamil said:

Can anyone confirm if this is legal? All of us are employed to do the same job and while I do tend to do one aspect more than others they do cover me when it’s busy / I’m on holiday and I in turn support their work when needed. In the new team structure this will continue to be the case so I’ll need to cover both roles and whoever gets the remaining jobs will need to support in my role as and when needed. 

The works still needs to be done in the post redundancy organisational structure. Your employer will have drawn up a redundancy matrix to determine who fits the role and who doesn't. Where there's no argument as to whose best suited. Then would be totally illogical to appoint some else into the role. As this in itself could cause considerable turmoil. 

While redundancy may feel appealing. With large £ signs dangling. The loss of pay and future pension contributions often get overlooked. Many people often later regret the decision to hastily jump ship. The grass isn't always greener on the other side. 

EnPointe

nlolamil said:

Within my team of 6 all of us were employed to do the same role and have the same contract. However, I tend do focus on one aspect of the role and the others deal with the rest. At busy periods the others support me and vice versa.

We were told our jobs are at risk. However my 5 colleagues have been put in a redudancy pool and can either take voluntary redudancy or apply for what is now two remaining jobs. I was told that while my job is at risk they are moving me to the new team to do the role I do for the majority of the time. I can either accept the new role (without the need to apply for it) or leave without redudancy. 

Can anyone confirm if this is legal? All of us are employed to do the same job and while I do tend to do one aspect more than others they do cover me when it’s busy / I’m on holiday and I in turn support their work when needed. In the new team structure this will continue to be the case so I’ll need to cover both roles and whoever gets the remaining jobs will need to support in my role as and when needed. 

I’ve worked at the company for a long time and the redudancy package is very generous so if I had the chance I think I would have taken voluntary redudancy. Of my colleagues in the redudancy pool a couple have worked at the company longer than me and have jumped at the chance of redudancy. 

I have queried this with a senior manager at work but only got a very vague response. My immediate manager, whose role is safe, and was not involved in deciding the redundancy pool was surprised I wasn’t in the pool for redundancy and is aware it’s something I would have seriously thought about. 

it depends on the  situation  and the selection criteria 

there was a role I did in the no so recent past where unless you  were a supervisor , a workplace trainer or a manager  everyone else had the  same job title.  

I was not any of the above  jobs so i had the  ordinary job title 

however 

I was a Fire Marshal (all the others were Supervisors or Managers), First Aider, Safety Rep (again all the other peopel in dpt  wit hthe same training were Managers),   had  certain practical skills and for the  most of the last 3  years i worked at that  organision was doing a specific subset of skills within the department  (   but  maintained currency on the core skills ( to the point i could   drop onto that  role  with a few minutes and deliver a top 2 % performance ) ,i also acted up as a workplace trainer at peak times ...

I was also cross trained into some other  roles on site and could deliver  acceptable  to good  performance  in those roles ( as  they leaned on stuff  i did in my day  job including in one case use of a quite niche  it system )

If i were an Manager or external HR person doing the pooling  becasue that department was closing or moving , i'd probably be asking the Managers to give  me  either or both of an absolute ranking  and  a 'skill leval sub pools'  type indication for the  staffi n that department. 

this sounds a bit like the Situation the OP is in 

lose the OP you lose  most of your skills  and knowledge with the certain thing , therefore  the OP gets matched across into a role which  has what they currently do most of the time as it;s designated focus  and the other  work  seems to be reducing ... 

  

nlolamil

Thanks for your reply - this has summed up my situation. They said as much when I asked why I wasn’t in the pool with my colleagues. 

I’m resigned to having to stay but I’m so unhappy about it as the colleagues leaving are those I work most closely with and I know work will be very difficult for the foreseeable future.
So, while I hope there may be further redundancies I don’t think I’ll be included and if I’m not and nothing improves I’ll have to look elsewhere.