Compromise Agreement offered (but company messed it up)...

[davepoth]

So this is a bit of a messed up situation. After a ridiculous disciplinary process, which took 6 months from the date I was given notice of the first hearing due to the gross ineptitude of the company, and their inability to provide me with either the actual things I had been accused of, or their evidence of this, I was given a first written warning, and have been told I am to be put onto an improvement plan (I have a meeting about it next week)

 

It was the culmination of a process that pretty much began with the appointment of a new Managing Director at our site. It seems he has taken a dislike to me for some reason, and wants me out. So far I have had clandestine investigations into my work, belittling of my position, victimisation and general bullying. I have a distinct impression that he's trying to manage me out of the business.

 

Combined with this I have been trying to get copies of a pay review where I was benchmarked against other people doing a similar job. I was refused access to that review, even after a Data Protection Act request, because it wasn't in my HR file.

 

When I received a copy of my HR file a few months later, the full review was in there.

 

So I filed grievances about both of those problems (the huge delay to the disciplinary and the lying about the pay review) and then had a meeting request from the senior HR lady at head office.

 

Right at the beginning of the meeting she told me it was a "without prejudice meeting" and then progressed to ask me how much I wanted to leave the company.

 

I said I didn't want to go, and then the HR lady said that it was decided that my post was going to be made redundant anyway (as a result of the alleged performance issue rather than my post actually being redundant), so I might as well.

 

I still refused, and was fuming all of the way home.

 

Now, however, I think they've made a bit of an error. Firstly I'm not sure the way that the company announced the redundancy to me is quite right, and secondly the fact that they offered to "pay me off" means that they have pretty much decided they want me out, doesn't it?

 

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

[Bigredbus]

Obviously, they want you out... established fact...

 

Now... why do they want you out may lay in the protracted procedure you went through...

 

Now there are two definitions of redundancy - the disappearing job and the disappearing workplace. Your case seem to be related to the disappearing job (?). They would have to follow a proper redundancy process...

 

-Consultation

-Selection Criteria

-Offers of Alternative Work

-Giving Notice to Employees

-Redundancy Payments

 

Now, you, also, could think about a compromise agreement...

Edited February 21, 2010 by Bigredbus

[davepoth]

It's funny, because the job won't be disappearing. I have an email from the department that they will be looking to hand off my job to stating that they are far too busy to take on my work for holiday cover, and if anything their work has picked up since that was sent...

[Bigredbus]

Hand off your job?... How is that?... Would they be giving out your position to someone else? or is the position to be merged with another one?

[davepoth]

There is a department at head office which handles the head office division's work. When I was going on holiday and told I had to arrange my own cover (another issue, but nevermind) I spoke to them about it, and got an email back stating that they were far too busy to be able to take on any more work.

 

Their situation hasn't changed at all, so they would have to take on at least another person to cover the work I currently do, especially given the specific nature of the work at my site necessitates a different workflow to that at head office.

 

-edit-

 

I'm thinking the thing I really need to do is to get my manager to reiterate what was stated "Without Prejudice" in a "With Prejudice" situation. That way the whole thing is admissible in an employment tribunal, which should make a pretty damn powerful case (The pay-off thing certainly results in a breach of my contract since it shows there is no trust between the parties any more) and if I can tie down the redundancy to being due to my alleged lack of capability rather than a lack of work then I think I'm more or less there.

Edited February 21, 2010 by davepoth