employment law

[dvdsteve]

sorry if this is an incorrect forum for this sort of thing but was just looking for a bit of ad hoc advice

 

my friend was employed as a school caretaker for a number of year

 

most likely due to a dispute between him and the school, they decided that instead of a caretaker, they were more in need of a site manager (similar role but slightly different duties)

 

they said that due to legal issues the new post would need to be advertised, which it was and he had to apply for,

 

for whatever reason he didnt get the job and now he has to move out of the caretakers accomodation.

 

my question is what are his rights in this situation, was he right to apply for the job in the first place, would they have to sack him or find him other suitable employment or does the fact that they have employed some1 else mean that they can end his employment solely for that reason, and is this really a "legal" way of getting some1 new to do his job

 

any advice would be appreciated

[calvi36]

If the job he was doing ceased as it has from what you have said regarding the different duties then he would have to apply for this new position. As his post no longer exists then he will be entitled to reduntancy payments. As the accomodation was given by the employer then the employer has the right to seek possession of the property as when your pal is made reduntant he will no longer be employed by the school. This is perfectly legal Steve, if your pal is not suitable for the new position as it involves other duties then they can say bye bye to him. But they must make him redundant and pay him.

[Guest ArthurP]

I'd agree with the above but I'd also point out that if this new role contained some new duties that your buddy was already qualified to do then he may have some come back on that.

 

A 'Site Manager' at one school may be called a 'caretaker' at another with no extra skills required other than what one is already skilled to do.

 

He should seek expert advise.

[Azalea]

This change of job description seems to be the way employers are going nowadays.

I seem to remember that the employer has to offer training to the employee in the event of the job description changing and only if the employee refuses or is incapable of carrying out the new tasks can the employer make the individual redundant.

If a tied house is involved it should be up to the local council to re-house the individual in the local area.

[artoo]

It sounds like they have claimed it was a redundancy, but to do that they would have to say that the new job was significantly different to the old one. Cant say from the facts given if they have done so.

Perhaps more importantly is weather they complied with the statutory dismissal procedure. They should have written to him to explain why his job was at risk, held a meeting with him before deciding to dismiss then offered him a right of appeal. If any one of those steps was missed then he was automatically unfairly dismissed and should bring a claim in the employment tribunal. From what you say, I sounds like there may well have been no right of appeal offered.

[dvdsteve]

yes - its very cheeky imho, but thats the way it is,

 

its the council, they dont want to sack people for fear of reprisal, they seem just to do it in an underhanded way!!!

 

i got the impression for him that they have been trying to push him out for a while by making things difficult for him, and in return he has been making things difficult for them - which may not be right but seems fair to me,

 

i suppose it has to be something serious for them to sack him so they have resorted to this, im not sure what hes going to do about it, personally i woulnt stand for it but some people would probably walk away from it and start again

[artoo]

He has nothing to lose in puttin a claim in, it's free and they may make him an offer to avoid the cost and hasstle of defending what sounds a bit "dodgy".

 

He can apply online via:

Employment Tribunals - Claiming and responding

 

dealines are very tight though, he has 3 months from the dismissal to get his claim in.

[calvi36]

Hi again Steve. Can you clarify that he has NOT been sacked? What stage all of this is at? I do not see any grounds for a tribunal at all at this stage. He would require his current job spec and the new job spec. If the two are more or less the same then there could be a possible claim. If they are very different then no possible claim. The new post was advertised, he was allowed to apply and was unsuccesful. His old post was made redundant and so was he, this is not unfair dismissal.

[artoo]

Even if it is a genuine redundancy the employer must follow a fair procedure for it to be a fair dismissal. Most cases are won on procedural failings in the Tribunal.

[calvi36]

Artoo, I am well aware of how tribs work my friend as i have acted as advocate on numerous occassions. This persons problem is nowhere near tribunal. As far as i read the person still has his job.

[artoo]

No offence intended Calvi, From the first post he appears to have been told he will be not given the new position, it seems logical to assume he has been dismissed or is on notice of dismissal. He can walk away or claim the Tribunal.

[Azalea]

They definately have to offer him the option of being retrained as the new job spec cannot be that much different from what he is doing now.

On the other hand if relationships have broken down that much between him and his bosses the best option would be to get some sort of redundancy package.

[calvi36]

No offence intended Calvi, From the first post he appears to have been told he will be not given the new position, it seems logical to assume he has been dismissed or is on notice of dismissal. He can walk away or claim the Tribunal.

 

None taken at all artoo. I don't see how this is a dismissal though, it is or should be redundancy. As for retraining, this is an option. If however as Azalea says and things have gone completely tits up then it would be best to walk away with the money and a decent reference. As you prob know artoo, going to trib can be nerve racking for a claimant. Before it gets to that stage then I would suggest every possible means is used to negotiate a settlement.

Steve, please tell your pal to keep copies of all letters sent by him and to him by his employer. Also to keep notes on all conversations, dates time, ppl involved etc, just in case he has to go to trib.

In his contract of employment (express terms)or councils conditions of service for employees in his grade, it should state what happens should his position become redundant.

[alibobsy]

Hubby works for a council and has seen this happen loads of times recently. They have even seen staff told their job is going, they are made redundant and then their old work is spread out amongst the rest of the staff (who are already at full stretch anyway). Just a new way of cutting staff I'm afraid, but I know of at least 3 staff who are going via tribs to challenge it, but who knows if they will win?

Good luck to the OP

ali x

[hunkston]

he should ask a professional about his rights if he was qualified for the job and he was let go due to a dissagreement he may have grounds of unfair dismissal. [edited]

[68904]

This is why people should join an appropriate union, to defend thier rights in situations like this.

68904