Anyone familiar with HR policy/employment law out there?

[WonderingWhatNext]

I've also posted this in redundancy but there isn't much traffic there so posting here just in case.

I wonder if anyone with knowledge of employment law could possibly give me a steer on this.

I am a civil servant and have been with my employer for just under ten years.

I have worked part time for about the last two years.

I have never had anything but positive feedback in appraisals etc (all documented). No aspect of my work has ever been criticised and I have had no problems of note during my employment.

Until now.

My employer is currently looking to 'strengthen' the area in which I work. On paper this sounds good, as I am the only person working in this area and, as I've mentioned, I am part time so I have had to work hard to do the 'doing' as well as the 'thinking' on my own. However, they are actually considering making me redundant and employing someone at the level above me.

I won't be able to apply for this job as I am part time and our big boss isn't a fan of part time working. I was fortunate that I was able to reduce my hours as I was returning from maternity leave but this has meant my career has been on hold somewhat since I returned to work - which is fine by me at the moment.

My job suits me at the moment and I am reluctant to give it up as DS isn't yet at school.

Given that the suggestion is to strengthen the team and it seems to me that they'd just prefer someone full time (no actual evidence of this) would you suggest I stood up for myself on this or just accepted that it's 'one of those things'.

If the former - what can I do?

So they want to make your post redundant and replace it with a more highly skilled one, which you would be entitled to apply for? I can't see a problem with that legally. Employers can use this tactic as a way to remove underperformers, as it can be easier than going through performance management. It is sneaky but very difficult to prove that is what they are doing if they have a business case for why the higher skill set is required. Not saying that is what is happening in your case, but it's certainly a possibility.

You could counter propose in consultation that they retain you in your current role, but if they have decided they want a full time role at a higher level, I'm not sure there would be much point.

I'm an employment lawyer. This sounds perfectly legitimate. You're able to apply for the role.

Thanks, Maggie. I'd honestly be surprised if it was an underperformance issue as it's never even been hinted at. In fact, I've been rewarded for good performance and, prior to my mat leave, was part of a group of recognised high performers.

I honestly think it's because I'm part time, but I guess the reason is academic if they're absolutely fine to do this.

The higher grade role doesn't necessarily have a defined higher skill set and I was, in fact, promoted to this grade temporarily to cover absence a while ago.

I guess if they want me out for whatever reason, I'll need to just accept that.

If you're convinced this is just a ploy to get rid of you then there might be a claim of unfair dismissal but you would need to be able to persuade a tribunal of this. If they simply had an issue with part time workers then surely they'd never have employed you in the first place so this is a difficult argument to run.

Thanks also, Ma. Unfortunately, they've not suggested I apply and I know they don't think this grade is suitable for part time workers.

They don't have a choice as to whether you apply. If your position is potentially redundant and this position is being created then it is an alternative employment opportunity and you are entitled to apply for it.

You might not get it but that is a different issue. If you don't get it and the only reason is that you're part time then that is potentially discriminatory.

Sorry, my reply posted before your last message.

I wasn't employed as a part timer, I was able to reduce my hours on return from mat leave.

My part of the organisation has not actively employed part timers since I have been there. Women have become part time following mat leave but that is all.

Thanks very much for your time, Ma.

I guess if I applied and didn't get the job it would again be for me to prove that I didn't get it due to my working hours. A vicious circle...

A final question. If my role is restructured out, how long must my employer wait before employing a new person at my level in my role (albeit on a full time basis)?

Hi Wondering. I work in organisational change and usually advise my clients to wait at least three months before re recruiting to a redundant role as this is the time period in which a claim of unfair dismissal can be brought. The longer they leave between making someone redundant and recreating that role, the better, as they can say enough time has elapsed for the original business reasons to change, or whatever. But after three months the risk of any legal comeback via a claim is dramatically reduced.

Thanks once again, Maggie.