DH told salary will drop is this a suitable alternative employement ?(31 Posts)
Long story sorry.
Redundancy situation at my husbands work and they have told DH that his current role no longer exists.
DH has been told by HR that he must take up an alternative role and that this alternative role is his job, as it is all his current duties. So they want him to do the same job but with an unknown salary
DH has been advised verbally by his boss that this new role is likely to come back a grade lower as they need to save money, which is a minimum drop of £200 per month in his pay packet, which would be impossible for us to absorb.
DH has objected to taking up this role as he has no information regarding salary/grade of this job and is waiting to hear back from HR.
HR said legally they can drop him two pay grades and if they deem it suitable alternative employment he must do it.
ACAS said if the drop in salary was enough to affect us, it was enough grounds to object to. (Which it would i.e. If forced into the new job, DH would be unable to travel to work as we have a very tight budget and spend £250/£300 per month in petrol for DH to commute to work.)
DH is looking for local work of course and if he finds another job in the meantime all is well
His work asked for people to put themselves forward to be made redundant and DH applied for voluntary redundancy but was told verbally by his boss that DH will never get it as he is needed too much. Nice to hear, shame the money is in question if he is needed so much.
DH will be told the salary in the next couple of weeks, if it comes back as his current salary great but if it comes back at the lower salary what can we do if anything ?
We would have to borrow £200 per month to keep DH working and the house going, which is impossible for us to do. DH couldn't quit his job as he would of made himself redundant and we would get no help/benefits until he got another job, yet if we can not afford for him to work what do we do ? Are his work potentially allowed to drop his salary for the same duties ?
Oh I am home with 3 under 4yo children. Two nursery fees and wrap around care would wipe out any potential salary I could earn. So I can not make up the shortfall.
oh no I am no expert but am fairly sure they can do exactly this in principle, however I think for redundancies affecting more than a certain number they must have a new structure and have consulted on it. So the fact it's all a bit fuzzy might actualy be illegal.
Awful for you though - hope he does get something else
well are you in a position to earn the same as him?
Erm.... so your DH is so essential to the firm they can't make him redundant but they just want to reduce his salary anyway. Of course he should say no and yes he must look elsewhere. They are just seeing what they can negotiate - all firms are at it at the moment.
If they want him that much they willl pay up. It will cost them more to hire a new employee. If they don't really want him they will just make him redundant anyway. Nothing he can do about that and if he takes a pay cut now and then they make him redundant all he will have done is reduce his potential redundancy payout as it will be based on his new reduced salary.
yes, except the bits of his job that are 'vital' may be able to be carried out at a lower grade. Or that's what they'll argue. Agree it's b*llocks
If you are a sahm why do children need to go to nursery??? Not judging just wondered about making savings.
If he is doing same job how can they change his pay. Bloody cheek
I know it is bollocks
They are saying that he is essential (which nobody is) and therefore must stay in job but at a lower salary and with a veiled threat that if he objected (which he has done) that they may have to let him go and that he would of made himself out of a job...i.e. no redundancy and out of work with no access to benefits. Argghh
Well, fingers crossed that the job assigned salary is the same as his current.
Did the figures I would have to land a job for £28.5 K to cover child care costs and that means coming home with zero money, just covering nursery and wrap around care fees ! Scary.
"If you are a sahm why do children need to go to nursery??? Not judging just wondered about making savings."
They don't go to child care, they are home with me (oldest is at school)
I was pricing up the cost of putting them in paid childcare, so I could go out and WOTH to try and cover the £200 drop in DH's salary. But it doesn't look financially possible at the moment.
We are better of with me at home and I will be going back to work when all the children are at school of course.
How can he lose his job with no redundancy and no benefits?
Your DH needs to start making meticulous notes and getting a formal written response to HR sumamrising what he has been told, any threats made and reiterating in writing that he is not willing to take a pay cut and wishes to be considered for redundancy. Noting also that his boss has told him he is essential to the firm and that his performance has never been questioned as evidenced by their desire to keep him.
He may need this if he is sacked or pushed out - a threat of a tribunal usually results in a negotaited settlement over redundancy and references.
But if he loses his jobs and you could earn similar to what he earns now then you wouldn't need to cover childcare either
MB if he chooses not to apply for a suitable alternative (which may be for less money) he will not be eligible for redundancy
Stealth - it's not an alternative. Its his old job. Just less pay. In your logic no one would be eligible for redundancy - ever.
No, I couldn't earn anywhere near what DH's earns, he has a reasonable job build up over the last 8 years with promotions. It is just the high cost of commuting and repayment of old debt makes our budget tight, another couple of years and the debts will be gone and we'll be much better off.
Our budget is completely doable, we have been on this budget for years but a drop of £200 is beyond us.
Plus on a lighter note, DH would go insane at home with a breastfed baby and a noisy toddler doing the school run ! The traditional set up of him working and me at home works for us. Up to now we were doing fine.
MoreBeta - that is what is happening where I work. People are being made at risk of redundancy and invited to apply for lower grade jobs in the new structure. As I understand it if they apply nd fail then they're made redundant, if they choose not to apply, no redundancy. Think it's fairly standard,.
BE, sorry to hear that, was just a thought. Hope he gets something else or the new job salary is on a par.
and they wouldn't be silly enough to use his old JD, they will rejig it to sound on a lower grade but make sure they keep in the bits they need
Thanks for the posts, we keep fingers crossed for a good result with the new salary.
I'll try not to worry until we need to. Very surprised we can be forced into a situation of working for a lower salary, oh well.
I believe only following a restructure, and only after consultation (or maybe something else if it doesn't affect a lot of people). I believe. But I am no expert, wish flowery was about!
If it was redundancy they would have to pay him for the time he was there - either x number of weeks or months' pay for the number of years he has worked, and this package would be on top of the one months' (or more) notice he is given. The other thing is, if they say he is so "essential", he could sign up with a headhunting/employment agency in his field, go for some interviews and tell the firm he is being tempted away with a much higher salary - if he is "essential", they might try to raise it to keep him there. As for the legal side of it (the "they can't do this, can they" question) I'm afraid I'm not an expert in employment law, someone in that field (or if you can find the answer on the Web) might be better placed to answer that.
That is why it is important to get down in writing that this redundancy excercise and reapplication for the job is a sham. It is his old job and HR have told him that. The employer has messed the procedure up already.
Fine. I understand when a firm restructures this happens - but here it is just a threat to terminate him without redundancy if he does not accept a pay cut. There does not seem to be a restructuring around his job that has been described as essential and that he is essential in that job.
I think the legal minimum for redundancy is one week's pay for every year worked, starting after 2 years. Plus notice, as sott mentions.
OP, rather than going out full time, if it comes to it could you find something around DHs hours to make up the £200 per month shortfall? I realise it's not ideal, but you could probably cover it with a Saturday job until DH can find something more local? I hope it doesn't come to that for you though.
PS. But don't say "I'm being offered a higher salary to join another company" until AFTER the redundancy decisions are announced by the firm! Else he might miss out on possible redundancy payments.
It sounds like this could be a case of constructive/unfair dismissal which you could take to an employment tribunal. The problem with that, is that as soon as it became clear that there is a definite pay cut then he would have to leave as he would need to say his position is 'untenable' and staying in a role sadly weakens your case. This happened to DH 2 years ago now and we took to tribunal. Because we had lots of evidence of them breaking the law in other areas they offered a settlement more than we could reasonably have won at the hearing so we accepted the offer just 2 days before the tribunal date. I would suggest a trip to your local CAB - we found the advice invaluable. Good luck.
Good news according to the advice centre I have been speaking to, apparently as this 'new job' is 100% same duties as his current position it is deemed the same job despite different job descriptions. Therefore under the 1986 Wage Act, they are not allowed to drop his salary.
Hurrah. Lets hope we can persuade his works HR team to see things the same way. [hsmile]
Join the discussion
Please login first.