Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Work

Chat with other users about all things related to working life on our Work forum.

Less experienced new starters given higher title and more money for same job.

2 replies

Whitershadeofpale · 30/07/2013 12:48

I apologise in advance for the length of this post.

I work on a team of six people who all work at assistant level. The level above us is co-ordinator level. The assistant level is very overstretched wheras co-ordinator's have more people than work.

As a result of this in November a co-ordinator returned from maternity leave and was told that she would be doing an assistant's job whilst maintaining her salary and title as a co-ordinator. She was extremly unhappy with this and felt as if she'd been effectvely demoted and left in June. In March another co-ordinator left and his job was unfilled until last week. Also in June an assistant left. Leaving a total of three vaccancies within the department.

All three have been filled within the past month at assistant level as management have correctly told us that there is no need for two new co-ordinators but we do need three people at assistant level. Two of the jobs have been filled externally and one internally.

18 months ago the six assistants, includig myself all had a different title and were attached to a different department, we were all given the choice of changing departments and titles. When we were moved it was done as a straight swap of job title and every other element of our contracts remained the same including salary.

It has within the last few days come to light that two of the positions have been filled at co-ordinator level, although they are performing an assistant's job the same as the rest of us. One of these roles has been filled externally and another by an internal candidate. Both are being paid a salary higher than the rest of the assistants. The internal candidate has made the same move as the rest of the team did 18 months ago however, whereas our move was seen as simply swapping departments her change has been treated as a promotion. The other assistant has the same title as us but is still recieving a higher salary even though all three are less experienced that the orginal six assistants.

I spoke to my boss of Friday and explained that I felt the situation was unfair as none of the exisiting team had been given the opportunity to apply for the higher level position and were told that they were on the same level as us. I am also unhappy, as are the rest of my team that the less experienced new starter's are being paid more (our wage is very low) for doing the same job. He was very dismissive and said he is afraid to discuss individual salaries and that he believes titles make absolutely no difference as we are all doing the same role, but that is unenabled him to recruit quicker in a 'like for like' hiring rather than a department reshuffle.

He also told me that there is a plan in place whereby in November assistants and co-ordinators will no longer exist and that instead we will all do the same job under the same new title that is yet ti be decided. This change will involved more skilled work but will not involve any extra pay and will again result in the six of us recieving less money than everbody else doing the same role.

Do myself and my colleagues have any grounds to take our complaint further?

TIA

OP posts:
hermioneweasley · 30/07/2013 19:29

Sometimes to recruit externally you do have to pay more than the internal market to attract people away from other jobs, so that may explain someod the discrepancy, but obviously not the internal candidate.

If any of the people paid more for the same work are men, you may have grounds for an equal pay claim.

Otherwise is it unfair, and poor management practice, but not unlawful. You coukd raise it with your trade union or employee works council (if you have one), or perhaps raise a grievance?

Whitershadeofpale · 30/07/2013 21:15

Thank you. I do understand about paying more for external candidates but not why they decided to put people in at the higher level without giving any of the people at assistant level a chance to apply. One of the coordinator roles has gone to a man and the the internal applicant is female. I'm also not sure about whether it's ok to hire under one job title at one level when they're actually fulfilling a different job role.

I've already decided to leave (not just because of this), but I've seen them get away with so many things because people just decide to leave rather than take it further that I'd like to know if they've done anything wrong (apart from morally).

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page