What do you think about my employer?

[rowingboat]

I'm just curious, but can anyone give me any advice or insight into an employement issue I have.
Like many large public bodies we have had a recruitment freeze for the past two or three years with a necessary payroll reduction met through early retirement and not replacing staff.
We have, effectively, had pay cuts through changes in our contract and I earn now, less than I did five years ago for the same hours.
Things have become very strained with annual leave difficult to negotiate due to low staff levels.
So a new role just came up which would have allowed me to increase my part-time working by around 6 hours per week. The job was in the office where I am employed, basically doing the job I currently do and was advertised internally, but kept very low key and it was made clear the hours would not be split between the many staff interested in increasing their hours/pay.
The problem was that, due to the lack of flexibility on the hours, I could only take on this role by resigning from my existing role, as the hours would have been around 43 combined.
After applying I was approached by a senior manager and informed that I would not be offered the job or even be interviewed as they didn't want me to give up my existing hours. The concern was that the hours I would be giving up, wouldn't be approved by HR to be filled and a gap would emerge which would be very difficult to cover with the exisiting staff.
The job has been offered to somebody outside the organisation, somebody left over from a previous recruitment exercise, so it's a fait accompli.
Although the position wasn't ideal for me family-wise I am pretty hacked-off to be passed over like this and I feel the management have been very underhand in this.
Any thoughts?

if the post was a secondment then your employer can refuse to let you apply, if it was a 'normal' post and i assume it was as an external candidate got it, then i'm afraid it sounds like you have been stitched up ... are u in a union ? covering hours is not your problem and your employer has no right to refuse you the right to apply for any post you choose

Hi Twoofus it was a completely separate post and I do think they are in a pretty dodgy position with this. I think they had it all planned out and had hoped that nobody would apply by being inflexible and almost hiding the position.
To a degree I applied to call them out on what they were doing.
I'm not in the union, but there is quite a strong one so I might send an email to see what it throws up.
Thanks for the advice!

So are they not letting you apply because your part time hours would be difficult to get a replacement authorised?

That sounds like discrimination based on your part time status. You could raise a grievance and potentially make a claim at tribunal but do you really want this other job that badly?

Hr don't make the decisions by the way. They advise and may even recommend but ultimately the managers of the operation decide.

It sounds like the strategic and operationsl reasons for the recruitment freeze have been lost if it is actually hindering normal operations like the taking of annual leave and replacing people doing essential work.

I don't think it's discrimination based on part time status. If there's a recruitment freeze and they don't want to lose anyone from posts because they won't be able to replace them that sounds like a general issue rather than a part timers only issue. They are not refusing to consider you because you are already part time, they are refusing to consider you because they are concerned they will not be allowed to replace you.

I do think it's worth complaining about though.

Agree with flowery. It is a nightmare getting hiring approval when there are freezes in place. Even though I know from an HR perspective that it is not 100% correct, I would have done absolutely the same as the mgmt in this case - filled the role I had authority to hire for, rather than risk putting in anther application for a hire that might then get refused. No it's not ideal, but then the whole 'hiring freeze' way of doing things is a manager's idea of hell on Earth - you need the work done but the powers that be think they can just squeeze and squeeze without fall-out.

Yes, you have grounds to complain but do try to blame the systme more than the manager in this instance...

I think it depends on whether a full time post would be replaced but a part time would not. That was the impression i got from the op and why I asked my first question.

If that is the case then something is wrong and that organisation is putting themselves at risk of grievances and other action.

I understand all about recruitment freezes. They are a bugger but more reason to keep your existing employees happy by being seen to be completely fair and tackling inconsistencies in the policy that prevent you from meeting your operational objectives.

Hi again,
thanks for the advice. I have contacted HR, but they were not very helpful and have advised me to contact the manager who has decided not to offer me the job. I don't think there is much mileage in going back to her at this point.
I am living the recruitment freeze, covering for other members of staff and working without adequate staff provision, so I don't need to be convinced of the problem.
I think my main gripe is the lack of consultation and the secrecy surrounding the role. The hours are also part-time, but slightly more than I already work, but aren't the same as the hours which have been vacated by staff, so there clearly was flexibility in the hours worked. I think the existing staff should have been consulted as these opportunities come up so infrequently and we have so few opportunities in the organisation at the moment.
So we now have a completely new incumbent with a notice period and an extensive training period and of course the existing staff will be providing the bulk of the support and time to get the new person up to speed, whilst not doing their own jobs.

I am going to have an informal chat with one of the unions reps as a final flourish, but I'm moving on now.