Advice appreciated
Getting_by
Posts: 5 Forumite
Hey!
I’m new here and have come into a bit of a pickle at work!
I started a training role almost two years ago and am due to qualify over the next few months.
I have been told multiple times by my boss that there is a permanent role for me when I qualify.
The previous trainees when qualified just walked into their permanent role without it being advertised or any interviews etc. They just had their contacts changed to permanent ones!
I was told by the boss a few weeks ago that when it gets closer to me qualifying that he “by law” has to advertise my job externally!
This hasn’t been done with the past few trainees here. And 99% of the other trainees on my course don’t have to apply for their roles either!
Do I have an argument for not being treated equally?
Is it worth fighting?
I’m unsure what to do !!
I’m new here and have come into a bit of a pickle at work!
I started a training role almost two years ago and am due to qualify over the next few months.
I have been told multiple times by my boss that there is a permanent role for me when I qualify.
The previous trainees when qualified just walked into their permanent role without it being advertised or any interviews etc. They just had their contacts changed to permanent ones!
I was told by the boss a few weeks ago that when it gets closer to me qualifying that he “by law” has to advertise my job externally!
This hasn’t been done with the past few trainees here. And 99% of the other trainees on my course don’t have to apply for their roles either!
Do I have an argument for not being treated equally?
Is it worth fighting?
I’m unsure what to do !!
0
Comments
-
Yes that's correct, by law it has to be advertised and you have no grounds to dispute. I wouldn't worry though, sounds like you have the job.People don't know what they want until you show them.0
-
What was your start date?
No by law they do not have to advertise the role. The question for you is what you do about it. It could depend on the answer to my first question, but if they don't want you they don't want you unfortunately. What feedback have they given you about your work so far?“I could see that, if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being gruntled.” - P.G. Wodehouse0 -
Kayalana99 wrote: »Yes that's correct, by law it has to be advertised and you have no grounds to dispute. I wouldn't worry though, sounds like you have the job.
Could you point to the relevant law as I don't believe that to be the case?Originally Posted by shortcrust
"Contact the Ministry of Fairness....If sufficient evidence of unfairness is discovered you’ll get an apology, a permanent contract with backdated benefits, a ‘Let’s Make it Fair!’ tshirt and mug, and those guilty of unfairness will be sent on a Fairness Awareness course."0 -
There's no legally mandated recruitment process, they do not need to advertise. It is often an internal rule of bigger companies and in the public sector though.
But you can't really tell them not to advertise either. It seems like that's what they want to do, and if they want to they can.
How has the training been going? Is there any reason you can think of why they might want to advertise it?0 -
@Masomnia
I started back in August 2017.
I have had really good feedback so far.
The boss said he want me to stay on as have other members of staff.
But the boss makes me feel like he doesn’t mean it if he’s going out if his way to externally advertise the role?!0 -
There are few jobs that have to be externally advertised by law. I believe that headteacher is one, although it is a few years since I was told that (when I was at university). I don't know of any others, or even if HT really is one.0
-
There's no legally mandated recruitment process, they do not need to advertise. It is often an internal rule of bigger companies and in the public sector though.
But you can't really tell them not to advertise either. It seems like that's what they want to do, and if they want to they can.
How has the training been going? Is there any reason you can think of why they might want to advertise it?
The training has been going really well so far. Having lots of positive feedback from multiple staff!
The only thing I can think of I was diagnosed with two chronic illnesses last year and have had a bit of time off with them. But occy health are aware and the medications I take have helped me not taking much more time off.
But if that’s the case isn’t it discrimination?0 -
What was your start date?
No by law they do not have to advertise the role. The question for you is what you do about it. It could depend on the answer to my first question, but if they don't want you they don't want you unfortunately. What feedback have they given you about your work so far?
I started back in August 2017.
I have had really good feedback so far.
The boss said he want me to stay on as have other members of staff.
But the boss makes me feel like he doesn’t mean it if he’s going out if his way to externally advertise the role?!0 -
Getting_by wrote: »The previous trainees when qualified just walked into their permanent role without it being advertised or any interviews etc. They just had their contacts changed to permanent ones!
This hasn’t been done with the past few trainees here. And 99% of the other trainees on my course don’t have to apply for their roles either!
Why don't you ask your manager (in a diplomatic manner), about the above - and why your role appears to be the only one that has to be advertised. Maybe also mention that you're only concerned because you really want the role.0 -
Kayalana99 wrote: »Yes that's correct, by law it has to be advertised and you have no grounds to dispute. I wouldn't worry though, sounds like you have the job.
Oh dear. Clearly number of posts isn't related to accuracy of content!
Very limited situations where a post has to be advertised externally 'by law' and this doesn't sound remotely like one of them. OP, ask your boss why you are being treated differently and what law he's referring to.
As for your health situation - discrimination has to be unlawful (not just unwelcome or inconvenient for the employee) and it doesn't sound as if that's the case, not least because you have no evidence decisions are being made based on your health.Googling on your question might have been both quicker and easier, if you're only after simple facts rather than opinions!0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 607.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards