Effectively Demoted - is there anything I can do?

[Nosilverlining]

My dept is being restructured, and as part of this my boss is stepping down from her current role into the level below (level with my peers, her choice). I will still report to her, so the result is effectively a demotion for me as she bumps me a level down, and also a significant reduction in my opportunities for development since she will own all the projects. I'm not happy at all about this, everyone else at my level and above is advantaged by the change, I feel seriously disadvantaged. Is there anything I can do?

Can you ask to change manager so that you are still managed by someone of her former level?

No, my area is very specific within the wider dept and she has positioned herself in the same sort of niche but with a wider remit, basically covering all of my development opportunities. I need to get some perspective, I'm extremely angry and hurt, need to know if I can act in terms of raising a grievance and whether I need to do that tomorrow. I feel as though I want to call her in the morning and say I'm considering my options.

Is this "level" in some official sense? Has your job/responsibilities/job title actually changed, or are you perceiving that your "level" has changed just because the person you report to has?

You talk about her covering "your" development opportunities. Are these part of your role and responsibilities or just something you hoped to be able to do and now will not be able to? In any sense are these opportunities something you are entitled to?

There's a difference between your employer doing something actually wrong and them doing something which isn't what you want/hoped for/would prefer. For the first it's justifiable to be angry and possibly consider raising a formal grievance. For the second it generally really isn't.

It's not possible to tell which it is from your post. It's sounding more like the second, but it's not clear. But I think before you go in all angry/do anything formal, you need to honestly reflect on which it is.

Yes Flowery, this is essentially what I was asking, have I lost perspective. I report to the head of the function, I have done so for a number of years, since I started the role. I have been one of 4 direct reports of that person. She has decided to hand over the head of function role to someone else, essentially to swap places with one of her direct reports, although not doing the same job that that person was doing, but in a newly created role doing specific work that she is interested in. Her other 2 direct reports will report to the new head, I will continue to report to my current boss, in her new more junior role. I do perceive this as a loss of status, although my job title and pay will not change. In addition, I do a main day to day job and a lot of ad hoc project work, it is this project work which my boss is interested in and will now take the lead on, instead of me.

Have you spoken to anyone about this? Do you know your current boss's boss well we ought to speak to about your concerns?

Yes, we spoke about it yesterday - I said I wasn't happy with the loss of status and development potential, she acknowledged that there was both a loss of status and development potential and said she thought I should try it out and 'not worry'. I'm not worried, I'm angry and feel that whilst the plan was in development my reaction would have been anticipated. I feel that therefore I have been given a clear message about my value and pretty much surplus to requirements.

Might be worth seeing if you can get a free consultation with an employment lawyer.

A couple of years ago, I had an additional layer of management introduced between me and my boss at the time, effectively demoting me. My lawyer recommended I took my employer to an employment tribunal and I won a constructive dismissal case against them.

really Daffs? were there any aggravating circumstances or was it really as simple as introducing an additional layer of management? I've tried a local employment solicitor this morning, no free advice just straight in with a £250 fixed fee appt - I will call acas later I think.

Obviously I have no knowledge of Daffs case but it really really won't be as simple as introducing an additional layer of management. Clearly that happens all the time, especially in growing organisations.

OP is there more to it that you are already phoning solicitors? It doesn't sound like they've handled it particularly well, but development potential isn't something you're entitled to, and otherwise it just sounds like you are (understandably) not happy about the demotion of your boss meaning the person you are reporting to is not at the same level as previously.

What might be helpful is thinking about what you think they should have done to manage this change? Clearly by mutual agreement they are allowed to change your boss's role, which has happened, but how do you think they should have behaved to make this acceptable in respect of the impact on you?

it just sounds like you are (understandably) not happy about the demotion of your boss meaning the person you are reporting to is not at the same level as previously

well I currently hold the most senior position in my specialty - she is dropping into that spot and therefore demoting me - I don't think it's just as simple as the seniority of the person I'm reporting to, she will be doing a significant part of what currently falls to me, I will be doing the grunt work on projects that I currently lead.

I should also say that she has no experience or expertise in my day to day role, only the project work, however I have an expert assistant at the moment who is moving on. I feel if my assistant wasn't leaving I would be redundant, and actually my usefulness now is confined to training up a new person to do the technical aspects my boss won't be able to do. She could easily learn to take over the overall management of that person and non technical aspects of the function.

Can you look at your job description and identify which aspects you are losing? I'm possibly being over-simplistic, but if you can demonstrate that on your job description it says x, but your boss will now be doing that, that is a hard fact that you can use to open up a discussion about it.

That actually isn't legal. Your manager cannot be demoted unless there is a vacant position to fill. If you speak to a solicitor you will have a very good case and I doubt it would go to tribunal. If it does it will cost £3k ish :(

"she will be doing a significant part of what currently falls to me"

Earlier you were concerned about status of reporting to someone on a lower level and loss of opportunities for development. What you're now saying is quite different.

You need clarity of responsibilities in the new structure if you don't have this already. If as a result of that you find significant aspects of your current role have been taken away, that's more of a justification for a grievance, assuming informal discussions don't resolve the matter.

Piffpaff unfortunately my official job description only covers my day to day role, not the project work and not the wider remit which I have been supposedly 'working towards'.

AuntieDee the 'vacant' position has been identified or created as part of a wider restructure - what I do think is that if a requirement for the role had been identified there should have been an opportunity for me to apply for it. I have been leading all the relevant projects in the area and supposedly working towards officially stepping up into the wider remit. Now suddenly because my boss has decided she can't hack it in the top job any more, the new role has become something we need and can be justified and paid for.

"That actually isn't legal. Your manager cannot be demoted unless there is a vacant position to fill."

Can you point to legislation or case law indicating that its not "legal" to demote someone even with their full consent unless there is a previously-defined vacant position?

"If you speak to a solicitor you will have a very good case"

Case for what? Are you privy to a ton of additional information that puts you in a unique position to assess the strength of a potential case the OP may have? Because I've not seen nearly enough to be able to say that.

Sorry but posts like yours really irritate me.

sorry Flowery it's difficult to give the gist without giving too much, to not be too long, and I'm feeling ranty!

She won't be doing any of my day to day job. She will be taking over the lead on all the project work from me. I wasn't specific enough about development - this is project work which I have taken on in order to prove my value in a wider remit, an official role which up until now had not been identified as necessary and budgeted for but which I have essentially been doing - slightly narrower remit than her new role but that's been fattened up as much as possible for justification.

ou point to legislation or case law indicating that its not "legal" to demote someone even with their full consent unless there is a previously-defined vacant position?

I'm not saying it isn't legal to demote someone, I'm saying it isn't legal to make someone else redundant so that you can demote someone of a higher position rather than make them redundant and pay out a hefty redundancy package. If their is a restructuring where there will be less jobs than current positions, then everyone is eligible to apply for those jobs who is currently working at those levels, no however someone working higher who would be facing redundancy.

I know the OP has a good case as I was a union rep who has actually hand-held someone through the same situation (and took legal advice from my OH who has in the past been an employment law solicitor). They only didn't take it fully to tribunal due to the cost involved (it costs approx £2500 upfront to get it to the court stage) - they took a payout equivalent to 6 months salary, on top of their current redundancy package.

Employers are not allowed to choose who to make redundant based on who is the cheapest any longer.

They also are not able to demote someone else to make a job 'available' to avoid making a higher paid employee redundant.

IF there is a restructure in your organisation then presumably this is a new role which has been created and I can't see what would be illegal about that. Was there a consultation period before the restructure? Were unions involved to ensure everything was done above board?

I'm not clear if your role has changed or not. If you have the same job at the same level on the same salary, all that has changed is your manager's role and therefore I can't see your gripe.

If you are now having to do extra duties because of her new role, then surely you need a new job description. Is your job/role specified in the new structure?

"I'm not saying it isn't legal to demote someone, I'm saying it isn't legal to make someone else redundant so that you can demote someone of a higher position"

That's not what you said. You said they can't demote the manager unless there is a vacancy. That's simply untrue.

I've no idea where your talk of redundancy has come in, the OP hasn't given any indication that she is being made redundant, and no one has said it's ok to base redundancy selection on cost.

I congratulate you on being able to assess from the OPs posts on here that she is in the same situation as someone you knew. You're clearly a better woman than I!

OP - "She won't be doing any of my day to day job. She will be taking over the lead on all the project work from me"

That doesn't make sense to me. If you are currently leading on project work, it is part of your job. If she is taking over that, then she is taking over part of your job. If leading on these projects is something you wanted to do but will not now be able to, that's something different.

I think my gripe is clear; the question is whether or not I have legitimate grounds for objecting. My boss currently occupies a role at the highest level of management. She is stepping down into the tier below, which is the tier in which my role currently sits, and in doing so she will push me down a level in the hierarchy. This will affect only me, no other managers at my level, because she has chosen to create herself a new role heading up my area, which takes in some of the work which I currently do – the project work. This work has previously been identified as a development for me, and I have been working hard towards proving the value of the bigger role to the organisation – effectively I’ve been doing the bigger role but have not yet received any official recognition for it. She will not take over the technical aspects of my role because she doesn’t have that expertise, so I will retain those and support her on the project work rather than leading it.

I'm sorry, I think I just made it more confusing - yes she will be taking the lead on project work which I currently do - but I do it as a development opportunity, not as part of my core job description.

How would you feel if they said: we're taking away your project work and giving it to her.
You go on doing what you've always done, and report to the HOD - not to her.

Is it the hierarchy thing that's upset you, or the fact that a substantive chunk of your responsibilities have been removed?

Can you think of a structure that would feel fairer?