Redundancy after maternity leave

[Waterlemon]

So back ground - 2 form entry primary school, but admissions have drastically dropped locally, so school is reducing to 1 form entry. Currently 2forms, Yr1-6 but Reception is 1 form.

My EYP (early years practitioner) /nursery nurse (eyp1) has just returned from maternity leave and works 2 days a week. It was DHT suggestion that she did those days, EYP was relived because she wasn’t sure if her request to go PT would be successful, although she had hoped for 2.5/3 days.

Another PT staff member (TA so lower qualified and therefore lower paid) had her hours increased to FT to cover EYP1 mat leave, and now that she has returned, has gone back to her contracted PT hours. So they are currently job sharing.

Another EYP (eyp2) also went on maternity leave at the same time as EYP1 (they actually had their babies on the same week,) but returned to work PT (am only) in October. Both EYPs were full time before mat leave. EYP1 has been doing the job the longest, so is the most expensive.

Both EYPs have been working in the school on permanent contracts for many years. There are also 2 other EYPs one FT and one PT. also on permanent contracts. (Originally all 4 were FT, but one eyp went PT following illness)

The TA has just given in her notice and will be starting a new job after May half term.

Eyp1 has now been told that there will be no job for her in September as they need the position to be FT. She is unable to work FT.

I’m pretty certain that this is illegal as surely both returning EYPs or even all staff doing same job role, should be consulted. . Eyp1 is currently not with a union.

Any advice that I could pass on, would be most appreciated.

[Psychobabble123]

@Flowery is a HR practitioner, hopefully she'll see I've tagged her and be able to advise you.

[Waterlemon]

Great, thank you!

[Waterlemon]

Bumping

[Appuskidu]

I found that difficult to follow-but I think you’re saying that Person1 was told she could be part time, came back part time, but now the job is only a full time one?

Is she a teacher/TA? Sorry-I’m not sure what an EYP is exactly? Do they follow the burgundy book? I would suggest they join a union pronto.

[sakura06]

Can she contact ACAS or CAB if she's not in a union?

Am I right in thinking she's currently doing the role part-time? Can they not employ someone else to do the days she doesn't do?

[Waterlemon]

Sorry, I find it near impossible to be Concise

An EYP is a higher level TA. We have 4 EYPs, currently doing same role/responsibilities. All were full time till recently. (Roles need to be FT) so no, they don’t follow the burgundy book.

TA 1 returned from mat leave after 50 weeks. Part time in agreement with head teacher. Now been told that from September no job available as role needs to be full time. Currently she is working in a job share but JS partner has handed her notice in. Permanent staff member for 10+ years. No redundancy package currently offered.

Ta 2 returned from mat leave after around 30 weeks. Also returned PT. permanent staff member for 5+ years. Her job role is still secure.

TA3 was FT but following a long period of illness, was advised by DRs not to work FT. Currently been working PT for 5 terms. Not sure what her current contract states as It is expected that she eventually returns FT in the future.

TA4 full time, permanent contract.

Only TA1 has been told that there is no longer a job available for her. I’m certain that this is illegal and they should be consulting all staff at same level/role.

The numbers on roll are dropping, so we are reducing from 2 form to 1 form entry. Therefore there will only be 3 of these Higher level TA positions required. (Full time positions but could be job shares)

There are also other support staff employed throughout the rest of the school. However the support staff in ks1 and ks2 are less qualified (and therefore much cheaper) and most work PT.

She is no longer with a union as she needed to save money!

[toomuchicecream]

The law is very clear. It's the position that's made redundant, not the person. So if the decision has been made that there is no longer a need for a PT EYP and you only have one person doing that job, then it's hard to argue against that person being made redundant. However, if you have 2 or 3 part time EYPs then they should all be notified that their job is at risk and put on consultation.

The most important thing she can do is join a union asap. When I was a TA in Unison, they took payment monthly so it won't be too much at a time. Alternatively, she should check if she has legal cover on her house insurance.

A school I know made their caretaker redundant and employed a site manager. They had to be incredibly careful to prove that the new site manager role was substantially different to the caretaker's job (it genuinely was - the Governors weren't that stupid). There was only one person employed as a caretaker and only one caretaker role to be made redundant, so it was a fairly open and shut case. The Unison Rep still tried to argue that more than one person should have been put on consultantion, even though there wasn't anyone else doing a similar role. The caretaker was also given the opportunity to apply for the new site manager job. Sadly, he didn't have the required skills, which is why he wasn't just offered the new job rather than going through the redundancy process.

[Waterlemon]

Thank you, that’s exactly what I thought was the case. (The job not the person)

This TA is very quiet, the 2nd TA is very bolshi and the third is protected by the LA through the OT service as she is on a managed return to work programme. So I think this TA has been chosen as she would be less likely to argue her case.