Advice requested re. re-org - WWYD?

(11 Posts)
TERFousBreakdown Tue 10-Apr-18 17:20:19

My workplace is going through a bit of a re-organisation with some very unfortunate financial consequences for a bunch people - and I'm in charge of dealing with the parts that affect my own department. I'm actually quite proud to say that, so far, I've managed to negotiate an individually tailored solution for every single one of my affected employees that makes sure they get paid the same or more than previously.

Which leaves me with one unfortunate case to resolve: myself!

I'm looking at a number of options, all of which come with a few pros & cons:

OPTION 1: STAY PUT IN MY CURRENT POSITION
Cons: I lose some 10k pa in terms of salary altogether.

I'm a high earner and I live on my own, so I could easily afford this from a purely financial perspective. But I'm also extremely good at what I do and - for reasons of fairness - don't think I should be accepting a massive cut to my salary out of principle. I also fear I may put myself into a poor negotiating position going forward if I signal to the firm that I'm happy to accept a cut of this magnitude.

I advised all of my current employees against this option.

OPTION 2: TRANSFER MY CONTRACT TO LOCAL SUBSIDIARY
Pros: 15% salary increase and the potential to instantly grow the number of people theoretically working under about 5 times (looks good on any CV).

Cons: Losing pretty much all of my other perks, losing any and all benefits from having built a massive professional network at the parent company over the years and basically starting from scratch. Accepting the limited professional growth potential available to someone with my profile at the subsidiary.

I negotiated this option for several of my employees and genuinely believe that it's the best solution for them. Their profiles (all classical technical types) are all rather different from my own (typical consultant/manager type with a technical background), though.

OPTION 3: TRANSFER MYSELF TO A DIFFERENT DIVISION
Pros: I get to keep all my benefits and most probably my current salary (to be confirmed). Mid to long-term career prospects are better. I'm a very good profile match.

Cons: Different paygrade structure. I'd have to also negotiate a simultaneous promotion (always difficult outside of ordinary processes) or demotion (possibly a bad idea for the very same reasons as accepting the 10k cut) as my current pay grade doesn't exist there.

This is the option that my own bosses have opted for and are advising me to take - however, their exact paygrade equivalents, unlike mine, do exist.

OP’s posts: |
UpperWallop Tue 10-Apr-18 17:24:50

I'd rule option 1 out for exactly the reasons you've stated.

Are you a woman?

Option 2 - what are the benefits you refer to that you'd lose?

TERFousBreakdown Tue 10-Apr-18 17:26:32

*potential to instantly grow the number of people theoretically working under me about 5 times

OP’s posts: |
TERFousBreakdown Tue 10-Apr-18 17:57:45

Yes, I'm a woman. Reasonably certain any male manager would have told them to fuck off the second the 10k pa was mentioned ... grin

Benefits I stand to lose are (among other things):
- My entire training budget (I'm in the tech sector, so self-financing gets into the tens of thousands unless a client is willing to pay for the exact skills in question - true for my techie employees, less so for my own, more transferable skill set)
- Various expenses I currently get reimbursed for but wouldn't be able to charge back to the subsidiary (again, not a problem for technical staff but a problem for someone in my position)
- A bunch of minor perks (discounts etc.) - don't care about these at all

And, the big one: my freedom to self-determine the kinds of projects and client accounts I work.

OP’s posts: |
boredofwaitingagain Tue 10-Apr-18 18:32:09

Option 3. And negotiate a promotion. If you can't do that then you are not as valued as you think you are. Also you can't get fixated on the fact that you are worth what you are currently paid - you might not be and general over payment to staff (not just you) might be one of the reasons for the reorg. In many companies the staff cost is the biggest expense and the most obvious to try and make savings from.

There is always option 4, find another job, of course.

trashcansinatra Tue 10-Apr-18 18:36:54

Option 4: go with option 2 and immediately start looking for another job with a different company in your sector?

Option 2 looks the best of the three. Depending on the length of client engagements, could you build some professional development into bids?

flowery Tue 10-Apr-18 18:51:02

Doesn't sound like you're in a position to make a decision without some more firm information about option 3 and how they'd accommodate you into the salary structure. If it involves a demotion that's a no, if it involves a promotion that might be a yes!

TERFousBreakdown Tue 10-Apr-18 19:03:59

@flowery, yes, that's the main issue at present.

In the long-term, option 3 is by far the most attractive in terms of what I actually want to do in the future simply in terms of the nature of the work available. I absolutely do not want to be the one of only a handful of female managers to start with, who sets the precedent for transfer-cum-demotion, though.

Having lunch with a bunch of their senior executives next week to discuss my options.

OP’s posts: |
daisychain01 Wed 11-Apr-18 15:51:00

Does the organisation have long term stability and financial health?

If the reorg you describe is due to adverse trading conditions or market saturation then I'd be looking at outside options. I bet you have lots of transferable skills at your level.

What you wouldnt want to do is go to all that effort repositioning yourself if ultimately the company is on shaky ground.

TERFousBreakdown Wed 11-Apr-18 16:46:59

No, the reorg essentially has to with new legal stipulations and compliance (really can't go into detail; regulated industry stuff involved). Firm is pretty much as stable as it reasonably gets.

I've had a bit of a chat with one of my HR contacts today, though, re. Option 3. Option 3 is basically out at this point due to a few things he told me in confidence regarding employee satisfaction. Huge number of complaints, truly terrifying attrition, etc.

I'm actually considering going to some of my employees for whom I had previously negotiated this option and advise them against taking it at this point. Can't go into details, obviously, but it sounds rather horrible.

I'm currently thinking Option 2 with a negotiated promotion. Which has just become a lot more realistic due to a few people resigning instead and thus effectively improving my negotiating position (can't afford loss of >50% of key subject matter experts).

I'm also going to make some enquiries about whether I could transfer some of my current team alongside myself, seeing as I can't in good conscience send them to subsidiary after today's chat.

OP’s posts: |
TERFousBreakdown Wed 11-Apr-18 16:50:34

And, FWIW, I do get business need; I'm not a soppy, touchy-feely type of boss in general. But I do believe that my best people are my very strongest asset and that I would be doing the firm as a whole a huge disservice by letting them transfer to a place that basically guarantees their resignation within a year or less.

OP’s posts: |

Join the discussion

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet

Already have a Mumsnet account? Log in