Ask a Law Question, Get an Answer ASAP!
I've been speaking to Bob and he has been very helpful. Excellent responses to date. However it has been difficult to explain things fully because I've been on a mobile so haven't been able to type. Also the situation has been complicated and Bob has answered some of the questions but perhaps need to giev a fuller picture. Basically I am in a management job in a factory. Someone in the twin role to mine focusing on particular areas left in autumn and senior management readvertised the post. I thought my job would carry on as before although I knew a restructure was coming up because the job description for this post when advertised at the time was similar to the one before witha focus on differnet manufacuting processes. A new person was then appointed to start on later on but the restructure had already begun by then before they started. In this the post would flow through into the new structure as though it was only slightly differnet. My job was to be deleted from spring and the 'new person' was going to flow through into a job with a different remit. My contention was that this job merged with mine but my employers denied this. we raised a concern before the new person started and we said the job after restructure would be a differnet job from before but they denied it. Eventually after several more meetings someone from HR said they would get an external consultatnt to assess the job before and after restructure and say whether it was a different job or not. They dragged their heels -evenyakkt they said t the external consultant had condluded that the job of the new person before and after restructure were different and that therefore it could not flow through. I was expecting them to then say I could keep my existing job because I thought thety coudln't make the new person redundant after only a few momnths. However they said instaed there woudl have to be a competitive recruitment process between the new person and me for the job, now agreed as being new. However the new person has been in post now for severak nibtgs and has been effectively carrying out the new job already with my own role winding down. tger person has been involved with second stage restructure of a team including restructure meetings and has been party to the restructure process. He has already set up new projects. I was not able to take part in the restructure process myself as I was involved in it myself. It now turns out retrospecitvely that the new person shouldn't have been involved with any of this and shoudl only have been employed initially until spring. I feel that the forthcoming interviews are a charade and unfair. I should add that for eight years previously to all of this I had been responsible for some areas so have the relevant elements in my JD in relation to particular manufacturing processes to have applied for the 'new job' when the restructure began if it had been presented to me then as a new job. three months later is too late and unfair. I would like to find a way for my own job to continue alongside his. I have approached this question with you in terms of whether there would be breach of contract with him if he were made redundant after the interview process and also whether he should have been involved in the restructure process. You have clarifieed these issues already. It was their error in saying incorrectly that the job should flow through because it was less than 20% different whereas this is now the case. In a nustshell do you have any guidance. I hope this isn't too garbled