Possibly forced into downgraded job - any advice please?

[employmentissue]

I'm currently on secondment to another department in my company, which is a big household name. The seconded position is at a lower grade than my substantive job, but I've kept the same salary as it was a secondment.

I've been in the new department for just over a year and with the company more than 20 years.

When I went to talk to my original boss in department about returning, he told me my subtstantive job was being reorganised. A new job, taking in my old responsibilities, would be advertised. Although he didn't tell me this, I don't think I would get it..I was appointed before he was and we've never hit it off, although I pride myself on being thorough and professional. Also, I know if he wanted to, he could just offer me the old job with the extra responsibilities - he wouldn't have to advertise.

A male colleague has been doing my old job in my absence, with some extra responsibilities. But the funding has disappeared for his extra responsibilites and I think this is a way of keeping him there.

It could also be my original boss is trying to persuade me not to go back to make it easier for him to move the man who's been doing my old job into the new position - he thinks I'd rather not have to reapply for a job.

The good news is that the new department wants me to stay. The bad news is that it would probably be at the lower grade, although there's a good chance I would keep the same salary. Also, the position in the new department is not secure beyond the next year for definite whereas my old department was a more secure environment.

My head tells me to jump at taking the new job. However, I don't enjoy it as much as the old job and it's not as challenging. I would also lose my seniority and my own office. I am very peeved that I worked hard to get my previous position and it's effectively being taken away.

It's unlikely the company would make me redundant because I would cost them a lot. Officially they could offer to redeploy me anywhere in the UK as the standard contract with this company is that you could be expected to work anywhere in the UK.

However, I have worked in the same location since I have been with them.

I have recently seen some emails which implied that it's a foregone conclusion that I'm not returning -even though I haven't given any indication that I won't be going back to my old job.

I am in a union and am asking for their advice. The rep has told me to decide what outcome I would like myself and they will support me with that.

So, to help me think this through, I would be grateful for any advice/thoughts anyone else could give me here.

I do need to get past the fact that I am quite cross about it at the moment and need to think about it logically - but I don't want them to get away with blackmailing me into something which might not be the right outcome for me long-term.

Thanks if you've stayed with this and have any advice.

[flowerybeanbag]

I think that's good advice from your union rep. Working out the best outcome for you rather than getting too worked up about principles is often much better.

What does your secondment agreement say about returning to your substantive post?

[employmentissue]

Thanks flowery.

The secondment is for a fixed period and can only be extended with the agreement of my substantive manager - so the paperwork gives the start and end date for the secondment and the fact that my pay and conditions would remain the same as my substantive post.

Judging by the mood-music, I'd be unlikely to get the new job in my old department and they don't have the money to pay the redundancy I'd be due - so it would be a matter of being redeployed. In theory that could be anywhere in the UK which would be impractical for me.

So, reluctantly, I think my only option would be to stay in the new job. I shouldn't moan - the money would be the same, it's actually an easier job with a better boss, but there are many aspects of my old job that I'm reluctant to turn my back on - I guess I'll have to come to terms with that. The alternative is to put up a fight, and if I'm honest, it does annoy me that there's an element of sex discrimination here (long history of this which I have not overtly challenged in the past).

[flowerybeanbag]

So your secondment agreement doesn't say anything about what post you are entitled to go back to?

If you feel there is sex discrimination you could put in a grievance. That might end up getting you your old job back, but you would need to consider whether you'd want that after having raised a grievance.

[employmentissue]

The post I'm entitled to go back to is my old job - that's how secondments are organised in the company and I have emails which back this up. I also have emails which make the clear assumption that the man doing my job now is going to stay there. I'm not sure what I would gain by putting in a grievance about sex discrimination, although there is a principle at stake which I feel strongly about.

I'm trying to negotiate to retain my grade in the new job - that's the best outcome for me in the circumstances I think and would be the path of least resistence, although I might not win that argument.

[flowerybeanbag]

Well, if you're entitled to go back to your old job and have reason to believe you could, or to whatever the equivalent would be following this reorganisation, but have reason to believe you will be prevented from doing so because there is a preference to keep the man currently doing your job, you could complain and might get the decision reversed. If this new job is basically the same as your old job and the reorganisation doesn't involve more widespread re-applying for jobs, you can complain about having to apply for the job on the basis that it should be just allocated to you.

If you have reasonable evidence to suggest this is all happening because he is a man, then that would obviously strengthen your grievance.

You might get your job back without having to apply if you put in a strong grievance. It's just whether that's actually what you want in terms of a working relationship with the people involved. But if the principle is important to you then you might want to consider doing it anyway, even if it might upset the apple cart a bit and be a bit stressful for you.

You could in the course of your negotiations to retain your grade suggest that you will otherwise be fighting the suggestion that you need to apply for your job back. Getting your regrade might be a bit easier and quicker if the alternative is a lot of hassle for them.

[employmentissue]

Thanks again Flowery. I've spoken to HR and they've told me my old boss is thinking about the reorganisation, which confirms my suspicion he's trying to pressurise me into staying where I am at the moment so he can shift the person doing my job into a version of my old role.

It would be an expanded role, taking in other responsibilities thanks to a third person having left and that department needing managing too.

But the emails I've seen definitely give the impression it's a shoe-in.

I think I need to decide if it's worth rocking the boat and what I would gain by it. I might get the job, ultimately, but might also lose any goodwill I have at the moment.

Obviously the person doing my old job wouldn't be thrilled as he'd be left without a role, but that's not my problem....mine was always a temporary move officially.

[flowerybeanbag]

You've got all the right things to think about and take into account when deciding what to do. I always advise focusing where possible on the end result you want when deciding what to do about something.

Have you got long before you are due to go back? Is waiting it out a bit longer an option?

[employmentissue]

I think I will have to make a decision fairly soon - within the next week or so.

My ideal scenario would be to return to my old department where I would be happy to accept new responsibilities.

But realistically if I'm not really welcome there - and it's evident from what I know that I wouldn't be - then I'd be doing that without the full support of my boss, which would make it difficult as it would be a very full, busy and quite stressful role.

I'm someone who thrives on the right sort of stress - i.e. work-related challenge - but I wouldn't want the extra stress of thinking I'm not wanted/supported there.

Many thanks flowery, I really do appreciate your comments and support - a sounding board from someone with your expertise but who is not involved in the situation is invaluable - everyone I would speak to in RL would have a subjective view.