one person made redundant - procedure issue?

[moonfairy]

Hello, I wonder if anyone can help. I am currently on long term sick with stress, depression and Shingles. I recieved a telephone call last Wednesday from my line manager asking that I attend a urgent department meeting at 9am the following morning. As is seamed urgent I thought it was only fair to attend. When I got there my line manager was waiting at the door and ushered me into a meeting with my department Director. Who then read a statement basically saying that due to a need to restructure the department my position was 'deleted' from the structure and as a result I was at risk of redundancy. I was told that there where some jobs available elsewhere in the company if I wanted to apply for them I could do so in the usual way. By Saturday morning I had recieved my formal notice of 'Redundancy Dismissal'

I felt at the time that I was selected for redundnacy due to my sickness record but could not prove it. When I tried to apply for the one position that I did want (and have been asking for since October 2007 - demotion and a pay cut - but I wanted less stress) I was hit with an e-mail to advise me that the company was in reciept of two Grievences against me.

This makes me feel that this was done to block my application. On top of this when the Grievences arrived in the post today a) the content is laughable - warrants verbal warning at best and b) One of the complaints was lodged on 22.04.08! and this is the first they have told me about this.

 

My questions to you are this;

 

1. Can the company lure me in under false pretenses, to then advise me that I am At Risk of Redundancy. Should I have not been told the truth as to why they wanted to see me and should I have been offered the opportunity to be represented?

2. Should my empolyer have told me immediatley that there was a grievence against me?

 

Thankyou in advance for any help / suggestions that you may be able to give me (CAB where not alot of help!)

[Goldlady]

Hi, I am sure there are people on here who can help you. I am 'bumping' up your post as probably not many folk were on line earlier.

[Cellbar]

Moonfairy - there is a process for redundancy, a consultation period, which they have obviously failed to adhere to, and this in itself is illegal. Do you have a company handbook? In the first instance you need to contact ACAS as they are very hot on this sort of thing. In relation to the meeting, again, they should have explained the situation to you truthfully, and put the request for your attendance in writing, allowing you notice time to organise a representative to go with you if you so wished. IMO they are acting illegal and you would have a good case against them - at least with the redundancy issue.

[Sidewinder]

Legally, your employer is obliged to advise you of the reason for your job being identified as 'at risk', and to consult with you over any alternatives which would enable you to stay in work. You are entitled to know why your job was singled out and which other positions were considered. The redundancy consultation process is an opportunity for frank exchanges of questions and answers, and you should ask the company directly whether your sickness record or the oustanding grievances formed a part of the decision process.

 

Although the employer would be entitled to take the sickness into consideration, the grievances should not have been considered as they were unresolved. As with any allegation, the outcome should not have been prejudiced - if you were already off sick at the time of the grievance this would complicate matters, but if they were considering redundancy at that time (one would hope this isn't a spur of the moment decision) then they should have asked you for a written statement as a part of any investigation or have asked if it would be in order for you to answer questions over the phone perhaps, with a more formal hearing later on if deemed neccessary.

 

In an individual consultation, it would still be good practice to hold a preliminary meeting to advise you of what is happening, and that your job is 'at risk' as a result. This should then be confirmed in writing with a timetable for formal consultation meetings. The advisory meeting should not be held under formal consultation as it would be natural for you to need time to gather your thoughts and set out any questions which you want to ask. Remember, the primary aim of the redundancy process is to explore every opportunity for you to remain in work. You also have to be given a right to be accompanied - redundancy is dismissal every bit as much as if you were being sacked, so the same rules apply insofar as having a witness attend the meeting with you - it is a breach of procedure and as a consequence their decision to make you redundant could be deemed 'automatically unfair'.

 

At the first consultation meeting you should be allowed to propose alternatives to being made redundant and ask questions as to why you?, why now? and whether anybody else has been selected, and if not, why not? At the close of the meeting a further consultation should be arranged and you should be provided with written confirmation of what was discussed - you should also receive answers to any questions raised prior to the second (and usually final) consultation. Once again you should be given the opportunity to have a colleague present at the second consultation, and in the absence of alternatives to redundancy it is at this point that you may be notified formally that you will be made redundant, and given notice as per your legal right or contractual notice whichever is the greater. You must also be given the right to appeal the decision - once again to not grant you this is a breach of statutory minimum procedures.

 

1. Can the company lure me in under false pretenses, to then advise me that I am At Risk of Redundancy. Should I have not been told the truth as to why they wanted to see me and should I have been offered the opportunity to be represented?

 

Unfortunately yes - this is a confidential matter which they may have wished to keep quiet until the decision was confirmed, so to invite you to 'an important meeting' would be in order, although you should have been asked if you were fit to attend. As long as the initial meeting was not a formal consultation there is no need for representation, but for subsequent meetings, then you absolutely should have been asked whether you wanted a colleague (or TU Rep) present.

 

2. Should my empolyer have told me immediatley that there was a grievence against me?

 

Ideally yes, for the complainant's purposes as well as your own. Matters relating to discipline and grievance should be handled in a timely fashion whilst the events are fresh in the mind. As stated above, being off sick, you should have received a letter outlining the grievance and asking you to either attend, or to answer some written questions to allow an investigation to proceed.

[/Quote]

 

I would advise you to give ACAS a call (08457 474747) and just ask for an opinion. They will not tell you what to do but will give advice as to whether your employer seems to have acted fairly. My opinion from what you have written is that they haven't.

 

You have not been afforded proper consultation

You have not been given the opportunity to ask sufficient questions or propose alternatives to redundancy.

You do not seem to have been given your rights to be accompanied or to appeal their decision.

If you have been refused employment in another role due to unanswered grievances, or due to a previous sickness record then this could also be unfair. If these factors are now deemed sufficient to refuse you the chance to remain in work they should have been dealt with through the company's disciplinary procedure at the time.

 

On this basis I would appeal their decision to make you redundant.

[Weird Al Yankovic]

Hello

 

What is the subject of the two grievances against you and by whom?

 

One is from the 22nd, what is the other dated?

 

What is so shocking to you that a grievance against you was filed on the 22nd?

 

How do you know a verbal warning is appropriate for the first grievance?

 

And you obviously admit guilt? Or is it what you would expect that transgression to merit?

 

You say you applied for a position (and have done since Oct '07), do you mean you applied for this position again but on/after the 22nd?

 

Has the company made other positions redundant recently?

 

Try and answer these as it is a little difficult to determine fairness from your initial post.

 

Regards

[moonfairy]

Firstly MANY THANKS to those who have looked at my post and have offered me advise and help.

 

Al - I will try to answer your questions as best I can.

Subject of grievences - The first one that was over a month old when I first saw it. The crux of this grievance is that this person finds my people management skills severe. And, that in a six monthly review I held with her I praised her performance but mentioned that she has a habit of going off and doing her own thing, which is great that she showes iniative, but at times it has had a negative effect on others, including myself, and that if she could 'keep me in the loop' then I can be better prepared to support her. She has taken offence to this, and in her statement neglets to add the reason behind my request to be 'kept in the loop'. My line manager also had issue with this persons lack of comunication, I mentioned this in the review. She says in her grievance that she has since spoken to my manager and he says he has never had an issue with her. (He will be at my investigatory interview.

The second grievance is from the best mate of the first one. She has resigned and has said that her six monthly review is one of the reasons she is resigning. Prior to her review I had recieved two verbal complaints about this persons conduct, the fact that she does not pull her weight, and doesnt answer the phone. I simply told her in her review that I wasnt as pleased with her progress as I had hoped to be. I then issued to her a list of daily duties she must complete as a minimum and that her probationery period would be extended for three months in order for her to make the necessary improvements. The main feature of her complaint is the 'answering the phone' procedure that I issued to her, her point is that no-one else in the office was issued it. In my defence that is because everyone else in the office adheres to this procedure, so no need to nag them into answering the phone!

I have never had a grievance raised against me before. I can at times be a little blunt, I never intend to be rude, but its funny how asking someone to do their job can be interpreted as being rude. That is why I believe that the worst punishment that I should receive is a verbal warning. However the way things are going I am not banking on that!!

 

What is shocking me? - It is the fact that my HR department saw fit to hold onto these grievances until after they had made me redundant. In the only meeting that they have held with me which was not a consultation, it was to tell me that my post was deleted, they had both of these grievances on file. I just cant get my head around the fact that they could keep a grievance on file for so long. I thought the whole point was to act upon a grievance in a swift manor so that all parties are still fresh in their minds as to what actually happened. The company handbook says that at 'stage one' the grievance should be dealt with in 5 working days. Have HR failed to follow their own procedure? The first I knew about these grievances was 10 minutes before the closing time of a job I wanted to apply for, and they knew I was in the process of applying. Maybe I am being paranoid but I find the whole thing deeply suspicious.

 

Other post - there had been a vacany for a post lower than mine since Septemeber 2007. In October I verbally consulted with my line manager about taking a less stressful position because I was having problems in my personal life, a less responsible job with no people management I felt would have been far better for my welfare at this time. I continued to ask him to let me downgrade all the way through to April 2008, just before I fell ill with Shingles and Depression. Every time I spoke to my line manager he always told me what a great job I was doing, how no one else could ever cope with all that I had done, the department couldnt cope without me.............. all the usual nonsence. Then on 22nd May I am 'at risk' of redundancy, starting a four week consultation period, only to be served my notice of dismissal on grounds of redundancy on the 23rd May.

 

Re other redundancies - yes there have been one or two so far this year. The company employ over 200 people, but having been loosing vital sales and contracts in recent months.

 

The company had the chance to avoid making me redundant, I had already offered to go down a level (yes I did want to negotiate salary but who wouldnt) instead all of the above has happened which is why I feel that I have been treated unfairly and think that I may have a case for either unfair dismissal on grounds of descrimination against my mental health, or constructive dismissal.

 

Incidently I have to go to the grievance meeting tomorrow, but if the company have not followed their own procedure are the grievences still valid?

 

Once again MANY THANKS to anyone who takes the time to read this rather long winded mail, and a VERY BIG THANKYOU to anyone who takes the time to reply, your support is invaluable. Appologies for spelling & grammar!!

[Sidewinder]

Incidently I have to go to the grievance meeting tomorrow, but if the company have not followed their own procedure are the grievences still valid?

 

Strictly speaking, to not abide by their own procedures could constitute a breach of contract. The grievances may well be valid, but a lack of procedure would invalidate any sanction taken.

 

Remember to document everything in bullet point format against a timeline for reference.