Active discussions

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

Talk
Work

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

Original poster

HELP PLEASE: job re-evaluated and massive pay drop ensues

32 replies

stuffedlikeaturkey · 21/12/2006 08:01

can anyone help PLEASE.
dh works for a local authority and has been seconded for last few months into a higher position, filling in whilst they recruit a new person foe that post (he does not want that job and has not applied for it0. He is due to return to his old job in 3-4 months.

He found out yesterday (by accident, chatting to another manager) that in his absence his job has been re-evaluated and the salary adjusted downwards, very substantially. His deputy is 'acting up' to his post so this has not been an issue as his 'acting up' salary is higher than his normal salary.

He was not told of the re-evaluation, nor invited to contribute to the assessment ( a case of out of sight, out of mind I think).

My questions are:

  1. Can a job be re-evaluated and the salary reduced like this? This is a London Local Authority for whom my dh has worked for many years.
  1. When seconded, is there not a legal obligation to be allowed to return to your original post on original terms?

Can anyone offer advise, please.

OP posts:
maryhadaharpsichordyeahlord · 21/12/2006 08:12

no they are taking the pee eye double s.
absolutely shocking behaviour.
he needs to get an appointment with HR today if possible.
I would put it like thiws - I have heard that this has happened but that can't possibly be true. Can you please confirm that someoene has the wrong end of the stick.

re your two questions:

  1. any attempt to "reevaluate" a role may be allowed to a certain extent by contract BUT a reduction in salary would (IMHO) amount to unfair constructive dismissal (as well as breach of contract).
  2. it depends on the contract and what was agreed, there is no legal obligation as such but any attempt to change his contract without consultation and AGREEMENT is a breach of that contract probably amounting to Constructive Dismissal.
is he in a union?
FestiveFrex · 21/12/2006 08:17

Your dh needs to check his terms and conditions of employment. If his employer is seeking to unilaterally change any of these terms, they are acting unlawfully.

If he is prepared to do something about it, he needs to raise a grievance (his local CAB will be able to provide a booklet setting out clearly how to do this). There is then a set procedure to be followed, with which his employers must comply.

Sobernoel · 21/12/2006 08:22

I think your dh is talking about Single Status evaluation, which has been being implemented nationally over the last ten years. Your dh must be in a role where he regularly works what used to be called 'unsocial hours', am I right? Or in a school/care setting where he was paid for 52 weeks but only actually worked 37?

Individual staff were not consulted over this process and the unions have still not accepted it, they have locally re-negotiated the term time hours for instance, here.

Local Authorities have to implement Single Status. Anyone whose salary is negatively affected will have two years' protection before they actually see a drop in pay (ie to give them time to find other work if they don't like it). If a member of staff doesn't agre to the new terms, they will be automatically dismissed on 31.3.07 and immediately re-employed under the new terms. HTH

Original poster
stuffedlikeaturkey · 21/12/2006 08:24

Thanks all.
dh is in a union but as he is senior management he knows, realistically, that Unison will not do so much to help. Sorry if any Unison members here, but I know that to be true also.

He is also not keen on making a big legal wrangle over this; he has worked there for many years and is highly thought of so is really angry and upset that this has happened.

We have got out his 'secondment' contract and it says that after the secondment, if his original post is not available, he can be reassigned to a commensurate post. I assume that means commensurate in terms of salary too?

apparently these 're-evaluations' are going on throughout the council so it's not a case of targetting him (small comfort).

His original post was perfect as he had negotiated 4 days a week so he can spend a day doing chilcare. He's been 4 days/ week for 3 years and does not want to lose that as he loves being with our kids.

OP posts:
Original poster
stuffedlikeaturkey · 21/12/2006 08:25

sobernoel: that's great information. where can I find out more about it?

OP posts:
Sobernoel · 21/12/2006 08:26

meant to add, this is a Government initiative set in motion in 1997. It is intended to ensure equality of pay across the board and will mean many workers are awarded substantial pay increases. That's no comfort to those facing a drop in salary, but there are fewer of them, nationally.

I don't like it either, I'm just explaining what I think your dh's boss means.

maryhadaharpsichordyeahlord · 21/12/2006 08:28

my god sobernow I have never heard of that. I expect two year's notice is probably justifiable in law.
yes, commensurate would certainly include equivalent salary. It sounds like they are using this as an excuse

Original poster
stuffedlikeaturkey · 21/12/2006 08:28

sobernoel - can I clarify? his re-evaluation has happened now, without his input etc.
Does that mean his pay is protected for 2 years from the re-evaluation? Or does teh 3/07 date kick in automatically? That's only 3 months away.

OP posts:
Sobernoel · 21/12/2006 08:28

Your dh should be able to speak confidentially to his HR dept if his manager is not approachable.

BUT, he needs to sign his offer letter pretty quickly if he is to avoid the dismissal notice - if he gets one of those he will lose any continuous service benefits he may have built up. I've got to sign mine by the end of today.

maryhadaharpsichordyeahlord · 21/12/2006 08:31

sorry, I think sobernow means that the two year's protection applies if you agree to the changes

Sobernoel · 21/12/2006 08:33

Stuffed...

Yes, your dh's pay protection will happen automatically from 31.3.07 for two years. If he accepts the new terms he will retain length of service benefits as well. But if he doesn't, he would be re-employed from 1.04.07 on the new terms, but treated as a new employee starting from scratch (ie shorter holidays etc) His pension won't be affected either way, I believe.

maryhadaharpsichordyeahlord · 21/12/2006 08:33

god, he MUST go and see HR today SLAT. any attempt to get him to agree or be dismissed at the end of MArch would be shockingly bad practice and certainly unfair dismissal. you say this is the first he's heard of it?

Sobernoel · 21/12/2006 08:34

Mary, no I meant that the 2 years' protection will happen whether he accepts the new terms or not. That's what we've been told here anyway.

maryhadaharpsichordyeahlord · 21/12/2006 08:36

oh, OK (It's harpichordcarrier btw).
I think he needs to speak to HR because it doesn't sound like this has been properly communicated and sounds like it might be separate from this larger initiative, if he hasn't been informed about the protected terms etc.

Sobernoel · 21/12/2006 08:37

The Unions have told us that it isn't classed as unfair or constructive dismissal even though there is as yet no collective agreement (ie union acceptance of the process). This is becuase the Council has shown that non-implementation would result in a substantial cut in public service and because every employee is involved, not just a selected few.

Sobernoel · 21/12/2006 08:38

He should have received a letter at home, explaining the changes and asking him to sign and accept them by a certain date.

pantomimEdam · 21/12/2006 08:39

Get him to phone the First Divison Association and ask about this. They represent senior managers across the public sector and if he joined, might be better than representing him than Unison. People often join unions as a result of changes at work like this. Worth calling Unison first though just in case they surprise you.

Or try Managers in Partnership, same as FDA I think.

maryhadaharpsichordyeahlord · 21/12/2006 08:43

that sounds like utter bollocks though, if you don't mind me saying. neither of those sound like proper justification. but no doubt they are getting good specialist advice.
I can see that the two your's notice could make it reasonable and fair though, because that's reasonable notice for an individual to find another job. but it doesn't sound like that is the case with SLAT's dh.

Sobernoel · 21/12/2006 08:43

Must go to work now and see who else has signed their acceptance letters - at the last count, it was 150 out of 700 employees! Hope your dh gets the information he need asap.

Original poster
stuffedlikeaturkey · 21/12/2006 08:45

just spoken with dh. apparently this is NOT taking place under the Single Status iniatiave.
He is also very uncomfortable going to HR with this as they are ''shockingly useless'' who will be no help.

He's in a very upset mood about this (I've just put the phone down on him for being so bloody negative and unchallenging about this).

OP posts:
Original poster
stuffedlikeaturkey · 21/12/2006 08:48

good luck sobernoel. thanks for taking the time to help me and best wishes for what si sure to be a challenging day.

OP posts:
maryhadaharpsichordyeahlord · 21/12/2006 08:58

SLAT I am sorry you have all this worry
your dh must speak to HR or his manager as a matter of urgency, I'm sure you know that. Whether they are useless or not is beside the point - he needs to draw his line in the sand.

Original poster
stuffedlikeaturkey · 21/12/2006 09:01

thanks all, I really appreciate your advice.

OP posts:
Sobernoel · 21/12/2006 18:53

Any developments, SLAT? Are you sure it's not Single Status, because it sounds very like it.

NurseyJo · 21/12/2006 19:26

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn