Can they do this?

[Voyager121]

I have a full time position in which I have been employed for the past 6 years, in the same role. My line manager accepted a job offer and left. I was led to believe he was being replaced like for like as his job was also a full time role.

However, the new person has been given a different job title and I'm receiving my previous managers work/key tasks to do. It's impossible to do two full time roles so I've refused and questioned why it hasn't gone to the new line manager. But they now say they haven't replaced my previous line manager and its part of my role.

It really is impossible to obsorb his workload within mine as I'm already working extra without pay. But they are adament it will be my role/tasks from now on as they are aligning my role.

Can they do this? I'm so worried, stressed out and anxious as it's so impossible to do it all.

[KihoBebiluPute]

I think you need to start job hunting.

Unethical employers will do whatever they can get away with, including putting unreasonable workloads onto employees who won't stand up for themselves. Your employers are clearly in this category. There are plenty of decent ethical employers out there who won't do this.

Your shyster employers will then have to face the reality that they can't recruit someone to do your job and your ex-manager's job on your salary. They won't come to that realisation while you are meekly accepting your lot and doing what you are told.

[daisychain01]

Itemise all your tasks including time to do them, including the additional work from your former manager. Calculate the total hours these activities will take you during a working week.

Take this to whoever the decision-maker was to show that your contracted hours are x hours, all the work will now take you y hours and please can they set your priorities as to which jobs are most important.

[Aprilx]

Employers are entitled to expect employees to carry out any reasonable request. Yes at times they will reallocate tasks and that would be normal and reasonable. Have your hours changed?

[daisychain01]

They won't come to that realisation while you are meekly accepting your lot and doing what you are told.

There is no indication that @Voyager121 is 'meekly accepting' anything. They are asking how to broach the matter with the person who made the decision, but without appreciating what was involved.

It isn't simple in the current circumstances to just get another job, at least not before trying to resolve an issue of workload, which is a mathematical calculation and prioritisation exercise.

[Voyager121]

I do think that I will have to look for another job, as I am really stressed out about the impossibility of it all.

I have listed all the tasks for my role and the time it takes. Which exceeds my full time hours.

My hours have not been increased and no pay increase either.

These changes they are trying to force are major changes. I would have thought that minor changes would be reasonable, but I'm surprised that being given a full time role of an higher grade on top of your full time role would be reasonable.

[Okokokbear]

Do the tasks differ from your job description? There's also the potential of bullying as giving too much is a recognised bullying behaviour.

[daisychain01]

They probably wouldn't automatically give you a promotion or pay increase. But it's their choice to reallocate the work.

You'd need to formalise your "business case" as to how it would be beneficial for them to re-evaluate your role spec and create a new role to include more responsibility and pay. Your argument would be that adding the bulk of work from another manager changes the nature of your current role spec beyond its original remit.

Or the alternative is to look for a new job. Only you can make that decision.

[Voyager121]

I have raised concerns over bullying and lack of dignity because my work would be returned for any little reason, for example if I had used the words they and was in a written report, I had it returned as not good enough because I shouldnt use those would in a report together. I raised a grievance as my work was being rejected for any reason, which was causing it to stack up. They practically ignored it and when I questioned it, they dismissed it.

[MaMaD1990]

Are you part of a union? Could be worth paying for the time being whilst you're in this. Do you think they are trying to 'push you out' without firing you (for fear of unfair dismissal case)?

[Voyager121]

I've only just joined a union so they won't advise me at the moment. I am wondering if they are try to push me out.

[Yellowfiledredfilled]

I think looking for another job in the long term sounds like a good plan - even if the latest increase in your workload had not taken place it sounds like you've had big issues with the way they do things - they are not going to miraculously become good employers.

[MaMaD1990]

To be honest, I would be looking for another job but absolutely push back on the extra work they are giving you. If its not possible for you to do it all, its not possible. No amount of pressuring you will change that and its their responsibility to organise extra staff if needed. I would advise that you start emailing yourself evidence of their behaviours towards you in case you ever need it (if you go to court). Any meetings, follow up with an email of what was discussed and said so there is a paper trail and make sure you send it to a personal email address. Worst case scenario, you could get signed off on stress leave too if it gets too much, I wouldn't wait for you to hit breaking point for this and it would also evidence their lack of care for employees.

[Yellow85]

It really depends on a couple of things: your job description documents - how generic is it? Your contract - are their any clauses in there that allow changes. Generally speaking the can make these changes so the debate would be more around whether your compensation is right for the new ‘role’. I don’t know how much change has happened but if it’s substantial, it wouldn’t be unreasonable to ask for consultation period - although the changes would likely still happen anyway.

[LaurieFairyCake]

Push back HARD - do not work longer than your hours

Log EVERYTHING you do - if they're stupid enough to send you back reports that's their problem, you make the changes and allocate half an hour of your working day to it

You must MUST record everything you do. Also set out your tasks for the week and email your direct boss and say I am prioritising these tasks - if they say you have to do these other tasks say 'which of the tasks I sent you would you like me to allocate to next week'

If they're going to get rid of you, you might as well reclaim your dignity

And I bet they don't try and manage you out

[daisychain01]

Your later update put a new perspective on this.

Whether or not it's unreasonable on their part, their contention is that your work isn't to the standard they expect. I would address that issue with them first and foremost so that it doesn't muddy the water, as they could use it against you.

If you have been employed by them less than two years, you would not have a case at Tribunal (I am not confident from what you've described that there is a "case", although there does seem to be poor management and unreasonable expectations) unless you can evidence some form of discrimination.

[Aprilx]

@Voyager121

I have raised concerns over bullying and lack of dignity because my work would be returned for any little reason, for example if I had used the words they and was in a written report, I had it returned as not good enough because I shouldnt use those would in a report together. I raised a grievance as my work was being rejected for any reason, which was causing it to stack up. They practically ignored it and when I questioned it, they dismissed it.

If you mean you wrote “they was” in a report, I would also return that and ask you to correct it. That is not bullying and nor is it a “lack of dignity” whatever that means.

If you mean they do not like the use of the words “they” and “was” in any circumstances, then that is very strange!

[Voyager121]

So for context, I would say 'X department confirmed that they completed the return on xx-xx-xx, which was before the deadline. This was returned as unacceptable with the reason that they and was should not be used together.

[sneakysnoopysniper]

A colleague and I found that we were attending so many meetings that the actual work was falling behind. We went to the manager with a breakdown of the number of available work hours in the month, how many were being taken up with meetings, and the fact that what remained was not sufficient to accomplish the tasks. We asked to be excused from some of the meetings which did not directly concern us, but this was refused. So we asked "which tasks do you wish us to prioritise and which shall we defer?"

Gradually the work fell more and more behind. Whenever this topic was raised we trotted out the same old horse about too many meetings. They never did learn.

[daisychain01]

@Voyager121

So for context, I would say 'X department confirmed that they completed the return on xx-xx-xx, which was before the deadline. This was returned as unacceptable with the reason that they and was should not be used together.

When it gets to that low level of nitpicking I would just accept they aren't worth bothering with and try to find a different role.

Whilst it doesn't relate directly to your original query about whether they can load all the extra work onto you, it does build a big picture that these work conditions are unacceptable.