To ask this question at work without damaging my job prospects

[Runnerduck34]

The company I work for been going through a restructure for the past 12 months, its now our departments turn.
4 months ago we recruited a permanent full time new member of staff. In order advertise the position it went through a process of " robust review" and was cleared by senior managers.
We have now just been told our team is to be reduced by by 1 x FTE
Im fuming. We have a meeting with managers tomorrow and I would like to raise this but clearly dont want to scupper my chances of retaining my job.
Should I say something?
DH thinks raising it will achieve nothing and its best to smile sweetly and say nothing.
He is probably right but right now Im so pissed off I now have to compete with my lovely colleagues for a job and that our new recruit resigned from a secure job to join our team.
I really want to raise it, if I do say something how can I say it in a way to make my point , keep professional, and not damage my job prospects ? Or is DH right is it wisest to stay nothing ?

And your point is? that your senior management team is incompetent? That what was true 4 months ago is no longer the case? Keep quiet, apply for the job, say the words they want to hear, apply for other jobs as well.

Personally I would listen to what your managers have to say about the restructure and how posts are going to be filled - the job specifications may be different rather than just being one fte post less. I am not sure exactly what you want to raise, so am with your husband, say nothing.

Your DH is right. What could raising this achieve, other than point out management are incompetent or making you look like you have the knives out for your new colleague?

Having gone through restructuring and redeployment twice, it's wise to sit back and say nothing. It will be like a pressure cooker as it is, don't stir things any more than they are already.

Thanks for replying, you are all probably right. I'll keep quiet.

Our workload is the same-i.e very high and job descriptions are the same
too.

Weve already had one meeting to explain it all, this is a follow up one .

I suppose Im trying to understand the reasoning behind the change in
required staffing levels after such a short period time. And if id be unreasonable, but agree probably unwise, to raise it!

We were continually assured by our manager we had nothing to worry about due to our high work volumes and restructure is meant to be about improving ways of working not cost cutting, although not sure anyone entirely bought into that line.
Its just rubbish to recruit someone and then have redundancies 4 months later, particularly as everyone knew about upcoming restructure, its a LA so not a small company.
I actually dont have the knives out for my new colleague, I really feel for her shes been put in a rubbish situation and is regretting leaving her old secure job. I admit to being peed off by the management though !

You are totally justified in being very pissed off (as are all your colleagues including the new one) but you are best venting it here and to friends and family.

So use this thread for that. Tell us just how very incompetent they are. I’ll be doing some supportive and incredulous shocked reactions such as “what?!” “Hang on, they actually said that?” And “frankly they’ll be lucky if you don’t all leave!”

But in the meeting say nothing.

Sorry Op. Its rubbish.

I'd ask about how value is addressed 8n the redundancy process. Your new colleague should be much cheaper to make redundant than you.

However usually LAs look at headcount rather than redundancy cost. I disorganised there will be a voluntary redundancy option first followed by compulsory redundancy if the headcount reduction targets aren't met.

Sorry for autocorrect garbling in the last message.

Completely justified, it don’t make yourself a target especially if going through a pooling exercise.

even worse if you make yourself a target prior to a pooling process as they could easily write it to be your role that’s going if there are slight differences between the roles

It's not last in first out on Local Authorities so your new colleague has as much chance as securing a post in the new structure as anyone else. In fact when we went through something similar the recently appointed person was deemed to better meet the new job description and was slotted in while the rest of the team had to apply for the remaining posts. So definitely do not do or say anything that might put you in a negative light.

Thanks for your replies.
I agree it's probably wisest not to say anything but the whole team are both angry and upset and a big part of me thinks our team is owed an explanation and right now wouldn't mind asking awkward questions! Possibly acting together is best.
A colleague did raise it at a meeting and I did then back her up. 3 out of 7 of us have , very politely!, spoken out so hopefully that lessens becoming a target. Will start to look for another job as well.
There are nearly 200 employees going through this phase of restructure and only 5 posts deleted, one of them is a post in our team- that was only recruited for in April after it had been signed off by restructure board after a supposedly robust process.
So that rubs salt in the wound.
It's just crap but appreciate everyone's sound advice to bite my lip! ( even though it really grates!)
I don't think the new employee is more vulnerable than us , she's only just been interviewed after all and they clearly wanted her.

3 out of 7 will probably end up in a final round of pooling.