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.

To be fair, objectively this is truly bizarre. Your job can go 6 months without being covered but is more essential than the other roles which presumably have been filled for at least some of that time.

Redundancy is a reflection of roles not people, so this is absolutely no comment on you, but I can see how the others might be annoyed your role is safe despite not looking necessary.

Why would you feel guilty? You didn't make this decision. She has every right to be pissed off if she thinks that similar roles have been unfairly treated.

What's been explained is that they only need a grade 2 admin now, so the grade 1 and 3 admins are at risk/will be made redundant. (My role is the grade 2)
Health wise, I'm making improvements all the time and have the help of brilliant professionals, but recovery takes time

Re. guilt - she was nearly ready to come back from leave when the announcement was made. I'm sorry it's stressful for her and the other colleague.

Whyvare you choosing to ignore the many posts that are explaining to you that it is highly likely that you won't be in the role. The role is safe but you are not. It will just mean it doesn't cost them anything to get rid of you. No employer in their right mind is going to keep someone that is never there due to illness. You will be managed out.

Is this just your team or across the organisation?

On reflection, does it matter whether OP acknowledges this or not?
Even if it's highly likely and turns out to be true, she can do nothing about it. She can hardly apply for other roles on sick leave.

She CAN stop feeling guilty for being in a 'better' position than other colleagues. And worry that she might go the same way... just without the benefit of redundancy pay, unlike them. Again, not going to accomplish anything.

But she shouldn't be feeling guilty about re-orgs , as she's not the one making any decisions anyway.

I'm being advised by the union - there are grounds to sue for unfair dismissal if I'm 'managed out'

Organisation wide

You are being misinformed with this. If someone is on constant sick leave and not doing the role they have been employed to do, they can absolutely manage you out.

Your union is wrong

Union lawyers are pretty time-limited in how much they can help, and you shouldn’t put all your eggs in this basket.

Depending on the degree and consistency of your absences over the past four years it would be quite easy to argue you are not capable of doing your role on health grounds.

would you be able to return to work in any capacity to be able to demonstrate you are improving and will be able to meet the needs of the business?

To be fair, 'managed out' may not be the correct term here. Technically that refers to making things so bad that someone leaves of their own volition.

They can however terminate your employment under capability grounds. No employer is obligated to keep you employed, even on unpaid sick leave for an indefinite period. With the other 2 admins gone the impact of your absence will be much more visible. Sweeping redundancies at various grades usually follows a desire to make the workforce more 'efficient', it won't take long for someone to question your attendance records and start the termination process - if applicable.

Are you/your union rep aware of your organization's sickness policy? What does it actually say?

She'll be okay.

I was made redundant in 2020 while I was on maternity leave.

I earned 27k. I now earn 45k and wfh full time.

I think you’re projecting a lot. You haven’t even spoken to her directly, you’ve only ’heard through the grapevine’ and filled in blanks yourself. A lot of what people say gets diluted or changed when it’s passed on by others and you haven’t heard their tone etc.

Shes allowed to worry about her job though, risk of redundancy is a hugely stressful thing - let alone with a young baby to support.

like others I’m not sure how your company can keep a role unfilled for 6 months though, I’d be concerned about my job security if they’ve managed without that role for so long and are restructuring.

edit: sorry just saw you have spoken to her, but it didn’t sound like her message said anything except she and the other admin are worried still so not sure where the guilt aspect comes in.

If the restructure is org wide are you really the only person doing the grade 2 role? If there are others at this grade and the only need to keep a certain number of grade 2s you could find yourself in a selection pool still.

Also, depending on how much distinction there are between grades you could find that the roles are deemed similar enough to all be pooled if others in the process complain. Often you find two levels are pooled because it would reasonable that the roles are similar enough that they end up getting pooled during the consultation process through discussions with those affected. Also if it’s company wide I assume that means it’s a collective redundancy consultation so the employer are consulting with reps at the moment? Unless your company is very small and it is individual then you may find that the plan changes significantly through consultation with the reps as they are encouraged to put forward ideas to avoid or minimise redundancies.

As others have said, your union has given you incorrect information re getting manager out due to your sickness. I presume your company has an absence policy and maybe even a capability policy. If there’s no date of return in the foreseeable future they can terminate employment on capability grounds. You’d be entitled to your notice pay and accrued holidays so not all doom and gloom.

Unfortunately, It doesn't make any business sense to get rid of someone who is able to do the job, and keep someone who is hardly there. Esp when they cannot say with any certainty when they'll be able return to work and do the job. Who is going to do all the work while you are not there (and the other two are gone)? I can't see how they will keep your admin post vacant indefintely, waiting for you to come back. There is either a need for that admin post or there isnt. If there is a business need for your role, then they need a bum on that seat doing the work. If there's no bum on the seat doing the work , then that means theres no work that really needs to be done in your role, and so the role must go. I suspect they'll alter the grade 2 role significantly to include some of the tasks undertaken by the grade 1 & 3 posts, and make the admins reapply. Not sure where you fit in all this tbh, and I would seek clarification from your hr. As previous posters have said, you could be managed out. To me it sounds like you think your illness protects you from redundancy. AFAIK people on Maternity Leave are protected from redundancy, so I'd be more worried about where you fit into all of this than worrying about your colleague on ML.

If no one has been covering your role for 6 months then it sounds like it is not required and should be included in any redundancy process. And unless its a specialist type of role compared to the other administrator positions I'm surprised it wasn't included in the first place and I would expect someone to challenge that as unfair redundancy.

It’s the roles that are being made redundant as such and not the person. So your role hasn’t been made redundant is nothing to do with whether you are good at the job or if you have been delivering. However I can see where she would be coming from and perfectly normal for her to think it’s not fair that you haven’t been around and she has so why’s her position redundant. However she’s projecting so you don’t need to feel guilty it is what it is.

Tbh I'm surprised your role isn't at risk too
You've said you're not currently doing your role and it's not going covered so doesnt sound like there is a role there and redundancy would be 3asy to argue.

They're saying they've got 3 roles that aren't interchangeable so targeted the roles around yours to only have 1 going forward bit you're not in work so aren't they leaving themselves with zero admins?

I think you are getting a bit of a rough ride OP but I also think your question isn't very clear.

In my opinion you don't need to feel any guilt about your colleagues. I think you are projecting a bit about why she may feel everyone should be at risk. She has asked a reasonable question I think - they appear to be not making a post redundant that has been vacant for 6 months. It is really not logical.

You need - as others have said - to take her cue and actually be asking some questions about the future structure yourself.

Can you manage the additional work that you would have when your return? Does the new structure seem doable to you? It logically must affect your post so whilst you don't have to be consulted on you do need to understand it

You're not responsible for anything to do with your colleagues' employment. There's nothing to feel guilty for.

The devil is in the detail with these sorts of things!
Re-reading the OP. The only 'official' communication she appears to have received, is that certain grades are being made redundant company-wide.

Nothing has been said about pooling or reallocation, that's the 'grapvine', but this could very well be left up to individual teams. @NWQM there has been no communication regarding OP's role specifically. So we don't know what's actually happening to it. ML colleague is probably jumping the gun a bit.

It's not inconceivable that the roles are combined as PP I'm replying to states, in which case ML colleague MUST be offered one, by law, if available.

If the OP is terminated on capability grounds said role then becomes available. Or, she could remain in it, and be terminated after the redundancies, or made to reapply in a second wave of restructuring. There's no guarantees here.

You seem to be quite smug about it- of course she is pissed off she may be made reduindant strauight after maternity leave, and you would be pissed off too. She may think you should be in the pool as you are not around much ebcause of illness- and you are noth pretty much in the same boat, but her job is at risk and yours is not, so she probably think its unfair, although I dont think she expects you to feel sorry for her.

Yes, if there are three roles but currently only one person doing the job (you’re on long-term sick leave with no replacement; she’s on maternity leave with no replacement), it’s not surprising that management are looking to cut back to one post. I work in a local authority and this is the kind of attitude that would be taken.

Aren’t women on maternity leave protected from being made redundant while on leave?