Being told my job description was changed after I joined

That's not why unions exist. They exist to help everyone. You seem like a terrible representative.

@tilyougetenough

Practical Steps Take

• Document everything: Original job description/contract vs. current duties (time logs, emails assigning Y-level tasks, impact on your core work). Note the verbal "consideration" of pay uplift and follow-ups. Get a copy of your current job description.
• Request a formal grade/pay review (or job evaluation): Most public sector employers have policies for this. Submit in writing, referencing the increased responsibilities and stalled promise. Frame it collaboratively: "I enjoy contributing at this level but need clarity on grading/pay to sustain it without burnout."
• Internal grievance: If they refuse or delay unreasonably, raise a formal grievance. This doesn't require union membership (you have a statutory right to be accompanied by a colleague or union rep even if non-member, though unions prefer members).
• ACAS: Call the ACAS helpline (free, impartial, excellent for public sector queries). They can advise on contract changes, reasonable adjustments, and next steps. Early conciliation if it escalates.
• Health angle: If burnout is affecting your wellbeing, discuss with your GP or occupational health. Stress from role mismatch can support a case.

But they only exist because people run the organisation and have the access to skills to ensure fair play.

It's a tiny amount to pay for the help they can offer if you need it.

Like an insurance policy. You don't wait until your house is on fire before you pay for house insurance.

It's one idiot's opinion

If you're in the public sector I would always say join a union. Or any job you have the option of joining a union, join.

Also see how things go

In meantime try and document these extra tasks and dates you are doing them. Make it clear you are working outside of your job role. I'd also query them magically changing the hob description after you've applied and been interviewed. They tried to do that with us recently and we all reduced to sign the new one. The phrasing was extremely vague and effectively would've made it hard to decline doing every one's else's job

Gotta say, I really resent paying union dues for the last 2 decades and never using the union only to fund their support of people who pay a couple of months when things go to shit. Imagine taking insurance out after your house burnt down and expecting them to provide a service. Selfish behaviour. Pay for your own solicitor. I dont want to.

Think of it as insurance. You wouldn’t take out insurance after your house had burned down and expect the company to pay out, would you? I used to be a union rep - we would take on cases for new joiners if we had capacity and felt that they had a strong case.

This is very typical of the public sector. Our senior manager just used to add jobs to the bottom of our job description when she felt like it without consulting the union or just covered every eventuality by adding “any other duties as necessary”. Piss take

No point. Unions are a farce like HR. If it's a contract issue, you can use your household insurance and see if you have a case to use your legal expenses cover under contract disputes.

You are only joining because you need help or else you wouldn't have bothered. It's like taking out insurance after a robbery. Too late. But you can still join but might have to wait before you raise an issue.

Unions (rightly) won't deal with an issue from before you joined. You should join because it's good to be in a union, but it won't help with your current issue.

Do you have the job description from when you joined? They shouldn't add things to your job description without your knowledge and explicit agreement. I would push back about that.

You are essentially asking for retrospective help for a pre existing problem, this is like taking out insurance and trying to claim for something that happened before cover started

Your husbands union might. Mine doesn't represent people who's issues predate them joining.

Rubbish! My DH is a union rep in the civil service and he would recommend anyone treated unfairly regardless of when they joined.

For the core question of job description changes, it can be changed to a degree, to evolve over time.
Changing beyond a reasonable level (in public sector this may be expressed in a percentage)

Changing the job description on the future potential of a grade change is not acceptable in this manner.
That triggers a full change in the role, and be subject to re-application to the new role. Not updating here and there with a grade / salary uplift

This is grievance territory, which does not require union membership, but without the union you don’t be the additional representation

With regard to membership / non membership there is a degree of benefit to non members as the relevant union is consulted on pay. Members have the opportunity to vote on consultations, non members don’t. Salaries are as per the grade so non members benefit from the unions collective bargaining (if it advantages negotiations)

The union may have rules on duration to qualify for the full benefit, but there could be a level of dedication by a union rep called to support a new member who has joined to benefit from support on an existing issue

Well that's taking the piss!

No, they're there to help everyone, not just you. So you join and pay in so that everyone can get help as, y'know, a union. I guess you mean you're not ideologically aligned because you only give a shit about yourself. Hard to take the moral highground with your exploitation case on that basis. I mean, I'm sure a nice union rep will help you out, but it would be good for you to rethink your ideological position thereafter.

My apologies, I missed the context of her reply.

Hopefully you are in a union. If not, politely raise a grievance ... they will then have to deal with it.

Mine paid for an employment lawyer when i was illegally fired, and was in and out of court for months, they then helped me when i was harassed at work, and again when we were being shafted over an office relocation. Then they helped me again when i had to claim unemployment money and there were questions about how and why the company i worked for were going bust.

Often what i find when people say "they couldn't help me" is that the union lawyers who know the law inside out and back to front have said there is no case to fight.

ETA: obviously the nursing and midwifery unions have not helped their members recently on certain issues. That is a whole other thing though

She did, at 5:33 pm UK time.

I’m not saying I approve of anyone’s comments, I’m just pointing it out.

I wonder if OP would ring Aviva and demand they help her if she had an accident abroad but wasn’t a customer, because you know, insurance is there to help….

Can you not see why I, as someone who has paid union subs for two decades, might feel a bit peeved if someone who has never bothered to contribute before joins just at the point they need help? It's like insurance, once the issue has started it's too late. But if you do this I hope you will at least carry on paying subs into the future.

you have to join in the good times, not just see your job go sideways then take the benefit of all the rest of our union subs to fight your fight.

I guess you'd cancel your membership after the case too?

Actually, OP never said she was planning to leave the union after a few months. It was one of the other posters who accused her of planning to do so.

Lucky she has you on her side @Catza.She doesn’t even have to pay you.