How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Ben Jones Your Own Question
Ben Jones
Ben Jones, UK Lawyer
Category: Employment Law
Satisfied Customers: 47889
Experience:  Qualified Employment Solicitor - Please start your question with 'For Ben Jones'
29905560
Type Your Employment Law Question Here...
Ben Jones is online now

I have undertaken significant additional roles not related

Resolved Question:

I have undertaken significant additional roles not related to my current job, which includes overseas audits. This started about 2 1/2 years ago, it started slowly but the additional work is getting too much and I feel I should have also received a pay rise for these additioanl duties.
I'm looking to tell my employer that I want to stop the the additional work.
Where do I stand on this?
Submitted: 1 year ago.
Category: Employment Law
Expert:  Remus2004 replied 1 year ago.
Did you complain at the time?
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
No, at the time my current work load was less than normal. The auditing work was used to fill this gap. However, my work load on my defined job role is now back to normal.
Expert:  Ben Jones replied 1 year ago.
Hello, my name is ***** ***** my colleague has asked me to assist with your query as she is travelling at present. Does your contract state you could be asked to undertake such additional duties?
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
No, it does state that I may have to take additional duties related to my job as the job description is not exhaustive.My current role is Russian & CIS certification manger, the additional work that I have been carrying out is ISO 55001 Asset management lead auditor, which is a completely different job and not reflected in my current job description.
Expert:  Ben Jones replied 1 year ago.
You may indeed challenge the employer over this and make it clear that you have been asked to do something not covered by your contract and that it has now become an unreasonable request. Whilst you may be asked to take on additional tasks from time to time, if this becomes a permanent feature then you are really being subjected to a change to your contracted terms and conditions. Whilst you cannot demand extra pay for undertaking such work, you can make it clear that you will no longer do it as it is unreasonable for them to expect you to do this, especially if this has significantly increased your overall workload. This is your basic legal position. I have more detailed advice for you in terms of the rights you can try and apply in such situations and the steps you must follow, which I wish to discuss so please take a second to leave a positive rating for the service so far (by selecting 3, 4 or 5 stars) and I can continue with that and answer any further questions you may have. Don’t worry, leaving a rating will not close the question and we can continue this discussion. Thank you
Ben Jones, UK Lawyer
Category: Employment Law
Satisfied Customers: 47889
Experience: Qualified Employment Solicitor - Please start your question with 'For Ben Jones'
Ben Jones and other Employment Law Specialists are ready to help you
Expert:  Ben Jones replied 1 year ago.
Thank you. In general this could potentially amount to constructive dismissal, which occurs when the following two elements are present:· Serious breach of contract by the employer; and· An acceptance of that breach by the employee, who in turn treats the contract of employment as at an end. The employee must act in response to the breach and must not delay any action too long. A common breach by the employer occurs when it, or its employees, have broken the implied contractual term of trust and confidence. The conduct relied on could be a single act, or a series of less serious acts over a period of time, which together could be treated as serious enough (usually culminating in the 'last straw' scenario). The affected employee would initially be expected to raise a formal grievance in order to officially bring their concerns to the employer's attention and give them an opportunity to try and resolve them. If the issues are so bad that the employee can't even face raising a grievance and going through the process, or if a grievance has been raised but has been unsuccessful, then they can consider resigning straight away. If resignation appears to be the only option, it must be done without unreasonable delay so as not to give an impression that the employer's breach had been accepted. Any resignation would normally be with immediate effect and without providing any notice period. It is advisable to resign in writing, stating the reasons for the resignation and that this is being treated as constructive dismissal. Following the resignation, the option of pursuing a claim for constructive dismissal exists. This is only available to employees who have at least 2 years' continuous service. There is a time limit of 3 months from the date of resignation to submit a claim in the employment tribunal. An alternative way out is to approach the employer on a 'without prejudice' basis (i.e. off the record) to try and discuss the possibility of leaving under a settlement agreement. Under a settlement agreement, the employee gets compensated for leaving the company and in return promises not to make any claims against the employer in the future. It is essentially a clean break, although the employer does not have to agree to it so it will be subject to negotiation. In any event, there is nothing to lose by raising this possibility with them because you cannot be treated detrimentally for suggesting it and it would not be used against you. Just to make a final, yet important point, that constructive dismissal can be a difficult claim to win as the burden of proof is entirely on the employee to show the required elements of a claim were present. Therefore, it should only be used as a last resort.