They’re headhunting for DH’s job while he’s in it

[user47000000000]

DH heard from an industry connection that his job is being headhunted for on the quiet. Background is that his organisation is hyper critical and aggressive with horrible blame culture. He didn’t get a great review last year and an employee submitted a grievance against him (which wasn’t upheld) last year as well. He spoke to his boss last year and said he felt concerned he would lose his job and was completely reassured this was not the case and was told he was being paranoid.

We spoke to a solicitor who said that because he’s been in the organisation less than two years they can just get rid of him and pay only his notice.

This seems ridiculous. Is anyone able to offer any advice? Now poor DH has to go into work every day wondering if this is the day he’ll be told to leave. His organisation have no clue that he knows his role is being recruited for. He is obviously starting to look for a job on the quiet now but he (and I) are incredibly stressed as he’s the main breadwinner and the solicitor told us that legally they didn’t even have to pay his notice period.

Thanks in advance for any advice.

Posting in AIBU for traffic.

From a job hunting perspective. It might be a good idea for your DH to take on the role of a headhunter for himself. Whoever is looking to headhunt his role will have initially made a list of target hunting grounds to find people from. Starting with the same industry, what are all of the companies a headhunter might find his replacement from? then open it up to similar or transferable industries, who are all these companies? Where did the person he replace go to?

So sorry to hear this. Sounds very underhand and sneaky.
Get him to change his name and apply for his own job. Imagine the look on their faces when he shows up!

They might be headhunting for the same exact job without actually planning on sacking him. Maybe he'll be given a different title and move to do something similar but not the same within the company. Maybe the company is looking to expand and want another department with someone on a similar position. You never know. Maybe they want to open another branch or someone with flexibility to go around to other branches. Don't assume they want him sacked. Might not be a great thing, but he might just move sideways?

Dp saw his job advertised in the newspaper.

He had no idea that they were considering getting rid of him

We ended up moving like TheJobNeverEnded did as we too lived in a rural location and like where you are there just wasn’t the companies around who paid the salary that Dp could get in the city.

Best move we have ever done.

We still live in a relatively rural pocket but only 30 minutes from Oxford Street.

Don’t write off a move as even though you can be closer to the City you can still live in countryside and be home for 6.30pm

Sorry but the more you post the more I'm not surprised they're managing him out.

That there was a grievance even MADE in his first year is very concerning, that it wasn't upheld isn't necessarily something to be proud of.

PLUS a poor review, AND then your post at 1126 yesterday rather suggests

A - it's not the job he enjoys but what it brings/offers

B - he's a clock watcher, never a good thing. (Senior roles of the type filled by head hunters, paying good salaries naturally expect employees to go above & beyond - that's always the case. I wouldn't expect anyone but entry level staff to be getting away at 5-6pm every day! And that's mainly because they're usually on a wage not a salary and so aren't encouraged to work extra lest they [rightly] expect overtime pay. And I've worked in a wide variety of roles, levels & industries since the 80's until a few years ago when my own health prevented work).

All those combined with your comments about it being a blame filled horrible industry/company...

Sorry it sounds more to me like neither of you are realistic about how employment works, in the uk (are you both British? I think you're living & working in Britain?) particularly in the current climate.

You can AS me if you like and you'll find I'm quite left wing and highly critical of employers not treating employees well but I'm not convinced that's the case here, certainly not totally.

Did he really take on board the issues brought to his attention by the grievance and the review and address them? Or did he just complain it wasn't fair and everyone hates him?

Has he done anything different to show his commitment to the company and the job? Has he sought to improve his approach?

At this point as well as looking for another job (and not being too fussy about that, it's an employers market at most levels right now, add to that this sounds like an industry where word gets about, so the sooner he's employed elsewhere the better before his reputation truly precedes him. He also needs to consider they'll not want his notice period to fall past the 2 year mark), he needs to honestly consider how & how much he's contributed to this situation and how he can avoid it happening again.

"not sure what your beef is but comments like “strolling out at 5:30” are very outdated" no it's not, I know very few people who get to leave work bang on time every day, at all levels, without it would likely have a very negative effect on how they were viewed by their boss/company.

"You both need to be realistic about what real companies expect of senior managers (and less senior ones for that matter)" totally agree.

"He didn’t ask for training but coaching" splitting hairs tbh. They clearly expected him to be able to perform on certain tasks and then he's not done so.

"Yes you should be reaching your targets of the job you’re hired to do but if you underperform in an area I think it’s ok to ask the business to support you in tackling this..."

Depends on the reasons why he's underperforming.

It does rather sound like he's just out of his depth, they're partly responsible for not realising this during the recruitment process and now it's all very awkward for everyone.

But he needs to be honest with himself in acknowledging that and correctly assessing his skills and aptitudes in being realistic about what roles and what level he can work to. That may mean a lower grade/salary.

But you both need to be much more realistic about working hours/conditions these days.

Harsh, but it happens. If you’re in a senior enough role to be missed then the company needs to think about finding someone. His options are : turn his situation at work around, you’re getting one side of the story but they are SERIOUSLY unhappy with him - what’s he going to do about it?
Leave and consider this a head start, it’s easier to job hunt when you’re still employed.

I definitely would not let the current employer know DH knows they are headhunting his position.

In his shoes, I would look for another job aggressively. I would be projecting a lot of confidence and state I have gone as far as I wish to in my current corporate culture.

If I was feeling brave enough as your DH I would look at the job description and work out whether I met/exceeded the requirements in the language they are using. If I was sure I met/exceeded the requirements I would let everyone know I wanted to be an internal candidate and get officially assessed against the criteria of the job (lots of headhunting companies do this)

@Horseyclop - what utter crap, what are you even thinking? A headhunter can say if his CV ticks some boxes, but his employer already hired him once and now thinks he can't do the job based on him DOING THE JOB. His manager isn't going to turn around and say "Oh my mistake, let's up your annual review from a 3 to a 2 because this headhunter just clarified that your CV is actually perfect for this role."

Surely he will have a case for unfair dismissal if he is asked to leave now as if they wanted to sack him it should of been at the time not months later

@TriciaH87 No-one* gets the right to sue for unfair dismissal until they have been in a job 2 years - he hasn't.

This is a Tory policy - I am surprised so few people seem to be aware of it.

*There's an exception for discrimination - disability or pregnancy for eg.

@MRex if this is at a senior level then Horsey Clop is right. He can ask to be independently assessed against the criteria/skill set of his job.

Can he find job and apply?

The whole headhunting thing is really immaterial. He hasn't artually seen this job advert- just heard about it. His gut is telling him he's on borrowed time.

Its much easier to look for work whilst you're in work. Don't go sick or walk out without notice. Stall as long as he can whilst getting his CV to every decent recruiter and leveraging every connection.

It is correct that he has no particular employment rights under two years service but they do have to give him statutory notice (usually 1 week) worth checking his contract to see what it actually states. They can't just hoof him out tomorrow with no warning (at least not without repercussions legally).

I would be inclined to get him to speak to his bosses & mutually agree for him to leave if you can afford it financially. It seems pointless him still being there if the feeling is that bad between them. Could he perhaps take on an interim type post somewhere else to tide him over? This is often a good way into a new job as well.
Good luck to you both. x

He can ask to be independently assessed against the criteria/skill set of his job

By who? The god of performance? The only people whose assessment of his skill set matters is his supervisory chain and that was done at his review, and they said it was not satisfactory. You don't get to hire external people to come in and dispute it and say your performance was good and you should be kept.

I mean seriously . What a daft thing to post.

So legally they can literally just say “it’s not working out, here’s your notice” even though he hasn’t actually done anything?

That is literally what a notice period means, yes.

@FFSfactory - he can ask for his desk to be made out of blue cheese as well, so what? We can all ask for anything we like. It's still up to the company to decide what assessments they do and how, as long as they don't illegally discriminate it's all fine. Even if they do get a third party to assess him they could let him go afterwards regardless of what the third party says. Unless there's gross misconduct or he refuses to work, they'll pay his notice period and he'll leave at the end (they can expect him to work or not during that period). His bosses might be wrong and he might be doing the most incredible job given what he has to play with, but they still have a right to replace him under current employment law and according to OP it seems very likely that is exactly what they'll do.

I really think he needs to start job hunting immediately and be grateful that this news reaching him has given him the opportunity to do so whilst in a job.

You're getting some dodgy advice on here. With less than two years service he can be sacked for any non-discriminatory reason. Assuming this isn't the public sector, arsing around asking for independent reviews or coaching etc is wildly unlikely to help.

Just popping in to say that staying after 6pm is not what happens in all industries. It happens in mine but at my DH's is very rare that anyone (including bosses) stays until that time unless there's a deadline. It wouldn't be the first time he leaves at 5:30-6pm and says everyone had left before him. Some people do start at 6-7am though, and they all have to fill timesheets to book their time to a project, so staying over your hours only means you are booking extra to a project and therefore increasing the cost of that project and reducing its profit margin. For that reason, working beyond normal hours is not encouraged, as it just means you are either not efficient enough, you are making projects more expensive to the clients and you are reducing the profit margin. The higher the position, the more that increases your cost per hour, and therefore the more you reduce the margin. So no, not in every industry it's a given that managers should work longer hours and in some industries doing that regularly means that you are not doing your job right. We don't know OP's husband's industry, but I think it's unfair to say he's a clock ticker because it might be the case that staying longer hours is not the thing in his industry.

I agree Coffee

Just to clarify the law, again. During the first two years you can be sacked for no reason (excluding discrimination), but you must, absent gross misconduct, be given your contractual notice. (So if your contract says 3 months, you get 3 months, not eg one week statutory notice).

However, if your contractual notice takes you over the two years but statutory notice does not, you can't benefit from the two years and claim unfair dismissal.

I also think the comment above about the grievance is unfair as you don't know what the person was like who issued the grievance. They might have been completely barking, who knows? It happens.

If they’re headhunting for a replacement, it’s likely that they’re paying a fee equivalent to maybe 25-30% of the position’s salary. If he’s senior and on a high salary, that’s a lot of money to replace someone so they’re obviously very keen to remove him.

He needs to get job hunting ASAP.