To not feel guilty about maternity leave colleague

[NinePumpkins]

I have been off work due to chronic illness since November of last year - actually, my cancer was diagnosed just after I started in this job about 4 years ago, so my whole employment has been blighted by my illnesses (cancer now in remission, other stuff going on). Nevertheless, I enjoy the job when I'm able to do it - it's an administrative position.

Recently, redundancy proposals were announced at my company, and in my team the other 2 administrators at the level above and below me were put at risk. My role is to be continued. I've now heard it on the grapevine that one of the others, currently on maternity leave, is annoyed about the whole situation, and frustrated that we weren't all put in a pool for redundancy?? I'm sorry she's heard the news while on mat leave and sure that it's stressful, but I'm confident I can return to my position. AIBU for not feeling guilty about it? I'm not sure when I'm going to be able to return, and am currently on unpaid sick leave, but I know things will ultimately be resolved.

Honestly I'd be annoyed too, if I'd always been to work, and you were always off sick. It would feel unfair. Also who on earth is going to cover your role, when you're off further? You may find yourself pushed out, when there's no one else covering your job.

When will you be back full time?

Capability/absence manage out the postholder without the expense of a redundancy payout and re-hire someone new.

It’s unpleasant but they are going to want someone reliable. I say that as someone with a chronic illness who has had periods of sick leave before anyone accuses me of being discriminatory. I have a long term condition and I have managed a department so I understand a balance is needed.

It may be done in tandem with the redundancy process to enable the redundant employees to apply.

If she has questioned the redundancy process (and we don't even know that she has) then I think that's understandable. You've been away for 6 months and the two people who have been covering your work are being let go. This means you will be the only Admin employed by the business, but you're still off sick with no return date. That just doesn't make sense to me.

I think it would be very strange if she and other colleague weren't questioning it to be honest. It's not necessarily about you, how good you are at your job or whether you "deserve" the role. The reality is that however deserving you may be you are not there to do it. That's not to say you should feel guilty, but I think people will naturally have questions over how the process has been managed and what your employers end game is here.

I think it’s quite normal to message your team after such a big announcement. She’d clearly messaged the other admin too. And it is natural they’d be upset. Did they know your role was safe?

I don’t understand their thought process. Surely with three admin and one role it would normally make sense to ask the three of you to reapply for the one remaining role or take redundancy? Do you all do the same role at the same level?

I wouldn’t be so confident you are ‘safe’ if you’ve been away from a role 6 months and haven’t needed any cover.

I also don’t think this thread is going the way you expected.

I was about to post this. Redundancies affect posts, not individuals, so if the pool of three people doing the same role is reduced to one, all three post holders would be put ‘at risk’ and invited to apply for the one post which will remain. The unsuccessful candidates would then either be redeployed if there are suitable vacancies, or made redundant. I’m not sure the whole process is complete yet.

Are you all doing admin jobs? If so she is right to question the process. She has certain protections under law being on maternity that someone on long term sick does not, mainly being that she is entitled to be appointed to the suitable alternative position. If they are keeping one admin position out of three it would seem reasonable/possible that the role would be deemed a suitable alternative and she would have the right to that role over any other colleague not on maternity leave.

Things can change during redundancy processes so I would not be surprised if the company decided to pool the roles after her complaint to avoid a maternity discrimination claim.

Your role must be getting covered in some aspect, it cannot be left uncovered for 6 months for business continuity. If your colleagues have been picking up your workload I’d expect to receive an update soon that all roles have been pooled unfortunately.

If I was you I would be more worried about the fact that you will probably be managed out without a payout

YANBU. Guilt isn’t really a useful or appropriate emotion to bring to work.

You don’t have to feel guilty personally. Your company should feel guilty though. I hope they get done for discrimination.

You realise you will now be doing the job of three people and won’t have any backup if you are off ill! Sounds like it’s not a great situation for any of you even if you are lucky enough to be the one kept on.

I'd actually be more concerned that they believe you are already being managed out via the sickness policy OP in which case they can keep your post vacant until it is required again and remove the other two through redundancy. I dont say that to try to worry you just as another potential scenario they could be preparing for which would possibly make more sense since you say they don't know when you are returning.

Usual practice in these scenarios would be for all three people to be put into a ‘pool’ and you all have the option to apply for the one remaining role. Given your role has been ringfenced, it implies there is something unique or particular about the nature of the admin work you do compared to the other two roles, which may explain why your role isn’t part of the redundancy plan.

However, as PP have said, I think this could be the company beginning the process of a managed exit for you based on your attendance/sickness record, so you may want to start getting yourself prepared.

Change generally is unsettling for most and whilst companies will always say that redundancy isn’t personal of course it is! Losing your job and the security it provides, especially at such a vulnerable time in her life, it’s natural your colleague will feel worried and upset. Put that with CoL etc and I think most would sympathise.

You just need to focus on you.

Yes unfortunately OP this seems to be the company's likely thinking on the matter. It doesn't make a lot of sense otherwise.

It's awful you've had cancer and I don't want to be mean but you can see why she may feel like this. If for 4 years she's been there every day, put the work in and now during her maternity leave they're letting her go and keeping someone who's barely been at work for 4 years, it's a bit shit for her 🤷‍♀️

I agree with the above posters, she is right irrespective of who has had what time off and why there are currently 3 admin roles - level 1, 2 and 3 they're reducing that to one and merging the work level 1 and 3 have been doing into a level 2 role all 3 should absolutely be part of the pool, the firm are either incompetent and any half way decent employment advisor would run rings round them or there's something else going on, add in the protection she has for being on mat leave and there's a tribunal case right there

This is what I don't really understand? The only role that they're keeping is the one that hasn't been covered for 6 months. I'm confused!

Are you sure you’re not at risk? If you’re off all the time who’s going to be covering the role when you’re off sick, presumably the other 2 have been doing extra work to cover your job. I know there are certain protections when on sick leave but they don’t last forever and the business will need to consider their long term options for covering the role.

What I mean is the role might be staying but that doesn’t necessarily mean you will be staying in the role? Once the redundancies are done they can go down a sickness dismissal route if they wanted to….which I believe would also mean you wouldn’t get any kind of redundancy pay out.

Honestly it IS bullshit that no one has needed to cover your job in 6 MONTHS and yet the other admins are being told yours is the role that is safe?

If no one needs to cover your job in 6 months your job doesn't need to exist.

Or have they been covering the slack for your absences and now they're the ones at risk? I would be furious too. It's nothing personal about YOU but about the companies decisions.

OP you might actually be better off being made redundant than managed out. If all three roles were at risk it went down to one role the colleague on maternity leave will have priority. You would be made redundant potentially with pay. Additionally you would have been made redundant rather than dismissed due to capability that might make applying for new jobs easier.

So who will do the admin work, if 2 of them get made redundant, and the one remaining person is off sick?

In her position I would be livid though I'm wondering if it's role rather than personnel that's safe. If an employee of mine had been in and out sick including 6 months currently, there's no way I'd keep them over a more reliable employee. It's not personal just employers need people at work no one sick leave though I'm guessing you are on ssp so cost them very little, I wouldn't be surprised if after the others are formally let go, your employment ceases on sickness grounds no redundancy required.

In relation to the mat leave colleague, whilst this should offer protection in her case, I've worked with companies who have costed the settlement figure for a claim into their plan, it really didn't make a difference to them which is unfortunate but just the reality.

You sound pleasant.

I wouldn't be so sure that you will be kept. The role that you are currently employed for is what is being kept. That does not mean that you are safe. I would imagine that after the amount of sickness you have had especially the one you are currently on with no return date means it will be very easy to get rid of you. If I was your employer I would be looking at managing you out using the sickness policy. It wouldn't cost anything so why would I make you redundant and cost myself money when I can get rid of you for nothing. Your colleague has better protection than you as she is on maternity.
Your role may well be safe but I very much doubt that you will be the one performing it.
By the way you are coming across as a bit smug with regard to your role being kept. It really doesn't come across very well.