Currently work for an 'agency', that agency supplies staff for company A. Both companies are owned by the same group of about 4/5 people, although officially they aren't. Company b was then started. Also owned by people with interests in both company a and the agency. Both company a and b are similar types of company, so think sales based, but selling different products. So one selling wine, the other cheese. The agency is in name only and solely supplies staff for a and b, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference from when we worked for company A to the agency. I officially worked for company A until my roll was switched to the agency. (Everyone's was, I'm now classed as contracted to company A) not the problem.
I was then asked to work for company b in a slightly different roll. So as opposed to sales, working on the website and associates tasks. Did this roll for about a year and was then told that there wasn't sufficient work and that I would have to go back to work at company A (Company b is a better job product and people tend to prefer it) my issue is what's happened is they have hired additional people under the title of a different roll and then got them to do elements of my old roll. So not a direct replacement, more of an indirect replacement. So employed people to work on sales but they also back fill my job when the website guys are backlogged.
I suspect they have acted within what is legal, but wanted other people's perspectives. The meagre wage is the same, so technically financially I've not been shafted, but the skills learnt in company b would look good on a cv and potentially open other rolls up. It's also a better company to work for IYSWIM.
Apologies for the post being lengthy.