Told at risk of redundancy but being compared to full timer

bo_rai_cho · 8 May 2019 at 12:40PM

I've been told today I am at risk of redundancy after serving over 5 years with the company.

They have put been in a pool of 2, myself and another co-worker who is senior to me and works full time. I work 3 days part time.

We have been told to fill in a performance matrix and present it, however is this comparison simply unfair as the full time employee will always produce more than me as they work longer hours?

I feel I punch above my weight considering I work 3 days, they get a lot more out of me. I am also a woman whos just come off maternity leave a few months back.

Is comparing the 2 of us unfair?

lisyloo · 8 May 2019 at 12:55PM

No it’s not unfair.
In fact how else can they make a decision without making a comparison?
It would be unfair to compare the volume of work without taking into account the hours, however you said performance not volume and they can certainly compare performance, that’s how it’s normally done.

If you perform better and they get more out of you then why do you appear wary of the comparison? Surely you’ll do well?

In practice criteria are often quite subjective and it’s extremely hard to disprove subjective opinions of criteria such as “team working”, “communication”.
I did challenge a mark I had once for something factual like punctuality but even then I was told the marking was relative to others and didn’t mean anything in absolute terms, so most likely you’ll have to accept whatever happens unless there is any blatant discrimination of a protected characteristic e.g. gender.

bo_rai_cho · 8 May 2019 at 12:58PM

I am more worried they have already made an assumption because the full timer produces more project work, I agree if purely based on performance I feel I easily compare if not slightly better but they never see that easily because the type of work we do varies. I feel I have been at risk more because I decided to go part time after maternity, rather than anything else.

lisyloo · 8 May 2019 at 1:50PM

My cynical view is that they usually know who they want to get rid of and they arrange the criteria and weightings of those criteria to get the result they want and have the necessary concocted “proof”.
Usually the managers decide of the gradings.

Unless there is actually proof of discrimination of a protected characteristic I don’t think there is anything you can do if they decide to say that in their opinion the other person performs better and from what you’ve said it isn’t directly gender related as men can also get flexible working for childcare.

It’s very hard to challenge and what would you gain?
Force people who don’t want to employ you to employ you?

Have you questions if you thoughts are justified rather than just worries (which would be quite natural)
Could it be for example that they might only have 3 days work and not 5 which would work in your favour?
The other person is presumably more expensive.

We all have fears it’s how we are made, but you may not be right about what the management are thinking planning.

Alter_ego · 8 May 2019 at 1:58PM

My suggestion woud be to read the government regulations for redundancy very carefully.
This happened to my partner a few years ago and the redundancy was dropped when they let on they wanted to get rid of part time workers.

bo_rai_cho · 8 May 2019 at 9:04PM

lisyloo wrote: »

My cynical view is that they usually know who they want to get rid of and they arrange the criteria and weightings of those criteria to get the result they want and have the necessary concocted “proof”.
Usually the managers decide of the gradings.

Unless there is actually proof of discrimination of a protected characteristic I don’t think there is anything you can do if they decide to say that in their opinion the other person performs better and from what you’ve said it isn’t directly gender related as men can also get flexible working for childcare.

It’s very hard to challenge and what would you gain?
Force people who don’t want to employ you to employ you?

Have you questions if you thoughts are justified rather than just worries (which would be quite natural)
Could it be for example that they might only have 3 days work and not 5 which would work in your favour?
The other person is presumably more expensive.

We all have fears it’s how we are made, but you may not be right about what the management are thinking planning.

Thanks you are right I have little proof.

Alter_ego wrote: »

My suggestion woud be to read the government regulations for redundancy very carefully.
This happened to my partner a few years ago and the redundancy was dropped when they let on they wanted to get rid of part time workers.

Thanks, there is a lot of weird comparisions which is what is making me suspicious. Their selection criteria is last 12 months performance, but I have been on maternity for half of it, so thats already unfair. I am part time, so already can't produce as much. Also I am a woman that has to consider child care.

Les79 · 8 May 2019 at 9:58PM

Until you know the OUTCOME of the situation you have no way of telling if they have discriminated against you or not (and potentially not even then)!

However, I appreciate your concerns. Have you raised these to the employer? I feel (and this isn't a legal opinion, just my opinion) that you would be wise to document, in writing to them, your concerns about each and every question at this stage. Give your employer an opportunity to address your concerns and ensure that it is a fairer process. At the very least put it on their radar that you won't be complacent if you are made redundant.

Can you gather any sort of evidence (without breaking IT/GDPR rules) to show how much work is available right now too? 3 days' worth or 5 days' worth?

If you ARE made redundant, consider making a SAR request almost immediately to obtain ALL information pertaining to you (including internal emails etc). There's always the possibility that something will be uncovered which will incriminate the employer, or maybe nothing.

Sadly, aside from that one must simply assume that it was a fair redundancy process.

iammumtoone · 8 May 2019 at 10:11PM

Same thing happened to me. I was only part time someone senior to me full time. Both made at risk with one full time job to go for in the department.

I declined to apply as I didn't want to work full time said I would just leave with my redundancy. What then happened was company offered me the role still part time (although longer hours than I was doing). There is hope for part time people up against full time.

Masomnia · 9 May 2019 at 12:32PM

Make a point of saying to them how much you produce per working day. And definitely do point out during consultations that comparisons over 12 months put you at a disadvantage because you were on maternity leave.

If they need one full time person then suggest they take someone else on as job share with you.

I agree with the above though that 9 times out of 10 they know who they want to get rid of. So just wait and see.

Manxman_in_exile · 9 May 2019 at 7:20PM

I assume you are not in a union?

Told at risk of redundancy but being compared to full timer

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free