New role or redundancy - weighing up the options

edited 28 June 2014 at 8:31AM in Redundancy & redundancy planning
9 replies 2K views
prowlaprowla Forumite
12.5K Posts
Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
Forumite
edited 28 June 2014 at 8:31AM in Redundancy & redundancy planning
I work for an outsourcing company, and at the moment I work pretty much exclusively for one customer; a role which i was initially recruited for, which I've been in for over four years, and which is specific item on the customer contract.

I've just been formally notified that my employer wants to change that, halving my time with that customer and working for another customer for the other 50% of my time.

My employer has offered me the above, with the alternative of accepting a redundancy package in about a month's time, which amounts to about 4.5 month's pay.

The offer also incorporates some changes to my working conditions (office-based versus home-based), and my salary would remain unchanged. The role itself would be more constrained that I currently do, but could be interesting regardless.

I've not decided either way what to do, and am weighing up the options; it would be great to get some thoughts on the following...

I think my employer may have made a mistake in offering the redundancy at this point in time, as their contract with the customer specifically states my role as a line item until the end of this calendar year. (There is also work imminent which will require 100% of my time.)

So I believe that I am being offered redundancy from a role which still exists and which they are contracted to provide, and need me to deliver.

As I understand it, a person is not made redundant, but their role is. So does that mean that if I accept the redundancy, the company cannot thereafter fill that role (it is precisely specified and is exactly what I do)?

I knew the change was in the pipeline, but I think they've jumped the gun by 6 months, and so compromised their position.

As I see it, I have the following options:
  1. Accept the new role and let the company take the flak with the customer.
  2. Accept the package as-is, shake hands and walk away.
  3. Point out the above and attempt to defer the change to the end of the year.
  4. Point out the above and attempt to secure a better package in order to leave quietly.
  5. Cause trouble because my employer is making me redundant from a position which is not redundant.
It'd be great to get comments back...

Replies

  • getmore4lessgetmore4less Forumite
    46.6K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper I've helped Parliament
    Forumite
    There is a thing know as bumping


    Although it's jobs that are redundant it does not have to be the people doing those jobs that are made redundant.


    What does the client think of this?


    What restrictive covenants are there in your contract to stop you taking the package and setting up Ltd to do the job for the client direct.
  • edited 28 June 2014 at 9:26AM
    prowlaprowla Forumite
    12.5K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Forumite
    edited 28 June 2014 at 9:26AM
    There is a thing know as bumping

    Although it's jobs that are redundant it does not have to be the people doing those jobs that are made redundant.

    What does the client think of this?

    What restrictive covenants are there in your contract to stop you taking the package and setting up Ltd to do the job for the client direct.
    Thanks for that.

    I've never heard of bumping before, then again I've never been in this position before.

    I think my company wants to keep me, it's just that my line management have a blinkered viewpoint and don't really know the work we do.

    The client doesn't know at the moment, and indeed the service delivery manager (who is the main point of contact with the client) didn't know. There was a situation before where a colleague left the company and they kept billing the client for him without actively recruiting a replacement; after a couple of months the client realised what was going on and withheld payment and it got a bit nasty. Two possible options for the client knowing would be (a) they go ballistic, or (b) they renegotiate my line item's cost. (Of course, one wonders how perchance the client might find out about it...)

    The role is implicitly an interaction between the two companies, and so I couldn't go around that. (Actually, another possible outcome could be for me to take the package and then my employer realise maybe I am best for the job and take me back on a contract... But that's more abstract thinking than a likelihood.)
  • prowlaprowla Forumite
    12.5K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Forumite
    Aha - bumping...

    A senior person whose job is disappearing can be offered someone else's job and that person can be made redundant instead.

    That's not happening here; they don't have anybody better qualified & more experienced to do my job.
  • getmore4lessgetmore4less Forumite
    46.6K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper I've helped Parliament
    Forumite
    As ever in these situations you need to decide what outcome you want eg, stay, go, no change, modified change and how to get there in the context of the players and what may happen when the two clients needs conflict(ie 50% each is not enough so what happens then) or this is step to somewhere else that you will definately not want.

    I find that the key is understanding the motivation behind the proposal, who is driving it and why. Then how influential they are against the other players.

    The fact that the service delivery manager is saying they did not know find out if this is true or are they just saying it, why has it got this far without them knowing.

    50% is significant cut unless you are underworked.

    Does this new to you customer have issues so you are walking into a conflict resolution situation which can be a good thing(high up know and you solve the issues) or a bad thing(getting set up as the fall guy).

    The redundancy offer seems a little out of place as the other offer seems to be a suitable alternative unless you have a workplace(home) clause in your contract but even that could be minor on it's own if you live close. but you can use this offer to engage in consulation to try to understand what is going on and potentialy a trial period which can stretch things out.
  • edited 28 June 2014 at 9:09PM
    prowlaprowla Forumite
    12.5K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Forumite
    edited 28 June 2014 at 9:09PM
    Thanks for the comments.

    I trust the service delivery manager's word; we talk a lot and knew it was probably going to happen at the end of the year, but right now is just bad for the plans.

    I did ask around about the new (to me) 50% client, and the word was that things are generally OK, so no major issues there.

    I think the motivation is a lack of understanding of the roles; there is also the fact that the current client funds my role 100%, and there is plenty of work (and an upsurge soon).

    I think the redundancy is really an underlining of the take-it-or-leave-it nature of the change and a move way from the home-based clause in my contract. There is also a job title change, which it also serves to underline.

    There are definitely factions at play here, and someone is trying to assert their authority; however, in doing so they may actually be putting the company in a difficult situation with the client.

    It is also entirely possible that they intend to continue to bill the existing client for 100% of my time and the new one for 50% on top of that.
  • getmore4lessgetmore4less Forumite
    46.6K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper I've helped Parliament
    Forumite
    Looks like you have the measure so keep digging(carefully)


    If they have done this before, beware could be just a double accounting and this will just end up in loads of overtime if the job is full+ time before the addition.


    How is holiday sick covered?
    Ask how you communicate with the client your availability is reduced.


    If you think the redundancy is a bluff(but prepared to leave) call them out.
    Ask for an official trial period.




    If it becomes a work from office not from home, then you are no longer available at home.
  • prowlaprowla Forumite
    12.5K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Forumite
    Thanks, at times I really think that the mgmt don't know their a... from their elbow.

    As it stands, I don't get overtime, but I work whatever hours are required and make things right under my own volition.

    That's a good point about asking how to communicate the reduction in availability to the client; they will be asking me to do things and I'll be saying not today, sorry.

    I am thinking that the redundancy is intended to enforce the timescales for acceptance (and to solidify the job title change), but I'm 50/50 on whether to take it.

    And yes, if it does turn office-based then the home availability could become an issue. Again, thanks for that thought; another one to add...

    Apart from the change from home to office based and it being stated that there is no salary change, there's no other info about T&Cs. So I assume they (holiday, sick, pension, etc.) will also remain unchanged. But I'll need to double-check that too.

    I appreciate the comments!
  • CKhalvashiCKhalvashi Forumite
    11.3K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    Forumite
    prowla wrote: »
    Thanks, at times I really think that the mgmt don't know their a... from their elbow.

    As it stands, I don't get overtime, but I work whatever hours are required and make things right under my own volition.

    That's a good point about asking how to communicate the reduction in availability to the client; they will be asking me to do things and I'll be saying not today, sorry.

    I am thinking that the redundancy is intended to enforce the timescales for acceptance (and to solidify the job title change), but I'm 50/50 on whether to take it.

    And yes, if it does turn office-based then the home availability could become an issue. Again, thanks for that thought; another one to add...

    Apart from the change from home to office based and it being stated that there is no salary change, there's no other info about T&Cs. So I assume they (holiday, sick, pension, etc.) will also remain unchanged. But I'll need to double-check that too.

    I appreciate the comments!

    I'd be asking for a fixed hours contract here, with time+ 25% over that. As an employer, I feel that reasonable, and if you think they're calling bluff, may be a way to get them to negotiate.

    Double check on the T's and C's before agreeing to anything, too.

    CK
    💙💛 💔

    I can spell, my iPad can't.
  • prowlaprowla Forumite
    12.5K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Forumite
    CKhalvashi wrote: »
    I'd be asking for a fixed hours contract here, with time+ 25% over that. As an employer, I feel that reasonable, and if you think they're calling bluff, may be a way to get them to negotiate.

    Double check on the T's and C's before agreeing to anything, too.

    CK
    Thanks - I have a job description of the new role, which I'll read, but I don't think it details the T&Cs.

    I will be sure to double-check the T&Cs though, as there may be other things snuck in there.
This discussion has been closed.
Latest MSE News and Guides

Mortgage rates

What can you (or should you) do?

MSE News

Train strikes

Your refund rights explained

MSE News