Restructuring - Applying for Own Job - Unfair Process?
Options
RestructuredMan
Posts: 3 Newbie
Hi All,
I work in the public sector and my company has decided to have a full re-organisation because of a £98,000 cut in funding. It means that the way the company does things has to change due to government expectations. The company therefore will be restructured.
Essentially it will be composed of four types of change
- A reduction in headcount in some departments
- Changes to terms and conditions to other people
- Some jobs being merged together
- Some jobs being abolished and replaced with other roles.
There will also be some departments and roles which will not change at all and all of the employees there have been told that their jobs are safe and there will not be another re-organisation in the next three years because of our agreement with the government department that oversees us.
Unfortunately the headcount in my role is being reduced from 10 people to 8.5 people. The method of downsizing the team would be for everyone to apply for their own job (with the same job title and very minorly tweaked description) and essentially whoever came out on top of this selection process would be offered the role going forward and the remainder would be redundant.
However it has also been announced that other staff, including those working in grades below us who have been told their existing jobs are safe, will be able to apply for our jobs as well. This has not gone down well at all, as whilst people acknowledge that 1.5 people in our role will be made redundant, we do not see why people from other roles should have right of application.
In all the other roles in the business where the number of people in a role are being downsized, only those who are currently in post can apply for the more limited number of roles as a result of the reorganisation. What's more the fact these people are safe and can apply for the jobs of people whose jobs are insecure because of downsizing, leaves a bad taste in the mouth of people in our role.
Unfortunately there is now a lot of tension internally in the company and the people with the safe jobs in lower grades are now being deliberately awkward to us and trying to blame us for their own mistakes, with their key aim to try and blacken our name as a method to try and enhance their own prospects of taking our jobs. Unfortunately we are all looking over our shoulder now because the lack of ring-fencing the roles to current holders has created a really unpleasant environment.
We are meeting with our union later in the week (we found out about these proposals Monday afternoon) and whilst we all agree that redundancies are unavoidable and people in our department will have to lose their jobs, we think that people who are in safe jobs, should not be allowed to apply for the jobs held by existing staff in a department which is being downsized
Has anyone else gone through a similar situation?
I work in the public sector and my company has decided to have a full re-organisation because of a £98,000 cut in funding. It means that the way the company does things has to change due to government expectations. The company therefore will be restructured.
Essentially it will be composed of four types of change
- A reduction in headcount in some departments
- Changes to terms and conditions to other people
- Some jobs being merged together
- Some jobs being abolished and replaced with other roles.
There will also be some departments and roles which will not change at all and all of the employees there have been told that their jobs are safe and there will not be another re-organisation in the next three years because of our agreement with the government department that oversees us.
Unfortunately the headcount in my role is being reduced from 10 people to 8.5 people. The method of downsizing the team would be for everyone to apply for their own job (with the same job title and very minorly tweaked description) and essentially whoever came out on top of this selection process would be offered the role going forward and the remainder would be redundant.
However it has also been announced that other staff, including those working in grades below us who have been told their existing jobs are safe, will be able to apply for our jobs as well. This has not gone down well at all, as whilst people acknowledge that 1.5 people in our role will be made redundant, we do not see why people from other roles should have right of application.
In all the other roles in the business where the number of people in a role are being downsized, only those who are currently in post can apply for the more limited number of roles as a result of the reorganisation. What's more the fact these people are safe and can apply for the jobs of people whose jobs are insecure because of downsizing, leaves a bad taste in the mouth of people in our role.
Unfortunately there is now a lot of tension internally in the company and the people with the safe jobs in lower grades are now being deliberately awkward to us and trying to blame us for their own mistakes, with their key aim to try and blacken our name as a method to try and enhance their own prospects of taking our jobs. Unfortunately we are all looking over our shoulder now because the lack of ring-fencing the roles to current holders has created a really unpleasant environment.
We are meeting with our union later in the week (we found out about these proposals Monday afternoon) and whilst we all agree that redundancies are unavoidable and people in our department will have to lose their jobs, we think that people who are in safe jobs, should not be allowed to apply for the jobs held by existing staff in a department which is being downsized
Has anyone else gone through a similar situation?
0
Comments
-
You could all just not apply for any of the jobs and make them do a proper selection process based on proper redundancy procedures and suitable alternatives.
If others obs are safe who will do them if they get your jobs.
Until they put you on notice of termination the job you have is still yours.
you should be considered for all suitable alternatives if your job is going.0 -
You could all just not apply for any of the jobs and make them do a proper selection process based on proper redundancy procedures and suitable alternatives.
The problem with that is that there are more people from other departments who can potentially apply for our jobs, than there currently are in our job even before the downsizing.
The way one of my colleagues put it is that those guys last week had a job. This week they still have a secure job, with a chance of a promotion but even if they don't get it, they still have a secure job.
Meanwhile 10 of us go in shootout with up to 16 others for a job which we already have. The thing about these 16 others is that the worst that happens to them is they keep in their normal job. Essentially despite being a higher grade, we are treated as second class workers.
Obviously we will be making our feelings known and requesting that the company only allows people in our current role to apply for them in the reduced headcount in our department going forward but there is a feeling that someone below us might have been earmarked for one of our roles in our team and that might be the reason they are going ahead with allowing external applications in.
If they do not implement a fair system that does not discriminate against us, then obviously we will seriously have to consider our options in an attempt to force the issue following discussions with our Union Reps.If others obs are safe who will do them if they get your jobs.
I think they will be openly advertised from what was discussed, but I agree that it doesn't seem right because I think it's fundamentally wrong that someone is made redundant and the next day someone else starts the role doing pretty much the same job with the same title and minor differences. For me that's not true redundancy, that's someone being pushed out. The problem is most in our department have been there less than two years, so have no unfair dismissal rights or entitlement to statutory redundancy.0 -
It seems there are some restrictions to the two year rule:
https://www.morton-fraser.com/knowledge-hub/dismissing-employees-less-years-service
Otherwise, in my experience redundancy "protection" even in cases where you should feel quite protected are flimsy at best. However, in the case that someone with less experience and skills than you has been given your job, you are entitled to know how this was assessed. Could be a case to be taken up by ACAS.0 -
Just an update - union on Thursday confirmed that they have got the proposals as they were originally thrown out following a strongly worded letter to management - our roles will now be ring-fenced so nobody from outside the department can apply for them unless they are not filled by current holders in the reduced headcount going forward.
Still talks ongoing about other parts of it. Seems my union subs paid off.0 -
RM if other people in your posts did want the redundancy, rather than reapplying for the posts, do you know if they would have been allowed to ask for it? I know a few years ago when redundancy was an option where I work, lots of people would have liked it but were told they could not apply. I wondered if this was why people from other posts in your organisation would have had the option of applying for your posts.Paddle No 21 :wave:0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards