Menopause and redundancy

[Libbyhill]

I was off sick a couple of months ago for 3 weeks due to debilitating menopause symptoms and not coping. I have been on a reduced workload since coming back. I’ve worked for the organisation for 7 years, always went over and above, well liked and had a good work ethic. I found out yesterday that the new manager is having a restructure and it looks like my post doesn’t exist in the new structure even though the work is crucial and still needs to be done, they are wrapping it up with another job which I will have to apply for. Mine is the only role that this applies to in a team of 20 or so people. Am I being paranoid or does this sound like I am being sidelined due to ongoing issues with menopause? The work is still there, I thought there were rules around this sort of thing? So pissed off. They talk the talk about their menopause policy and supporting women. I just don’t think I’ve got the strength to fight it.

I'm sorry this is happening to you. But "work" isn't made redundant, roles are. If, and it's a huge IF, you can show that the driving force behind the restructure is to prevent a menopausal woman from having a job... You see the problem? I do sympathise. But sometimes it just is what it is. To be honest, if they didn't miss you for three weeks and then coped easily on a reduced workload, it does raise the question.....

Well you could say that when someone goes on holiday for 2-3 weeks or on maternity leave/long term sickness. They aren’t always replaced, the work is just picked up by other members of the team. I’m a creative director for an advertising agency and I have covered work for people when they’ve been off for long periods - it’s just what happens. It doesn’t mean they can do without you. Also, where did I mention they’ve coped easily? I’m constantly getting asked when I’ll feel better enough to take more on again.

When you say apply for the job, is everyone having to reapply? Is there someone already in the post absorbing your role? It'd be naieve to assume stuff like this doesn't have an adverse effect, but similarly it'd be tricky to prove they've restructured the role solely because you were off for a few weeks.

You need some legal advice.

Very odd that no one else is affected by a restructure.

I would email both HR and your manager and ask in writing for the rational behind the fact that only your post is being made redundant when there is clearly a demand in the organisation for what you are currently doing and what criteria/business case they have used to come to that decision.

Also why do you have to apply for this new role if it close to what you are currently doing? what didn't the manager just have a discussion with you about amending your current duties?

Are you the oldest person in the team?

I would get advice on whether this is indeed a way to simply get rid of you and it you have a case for age discrimination/unfair dismissal.

I think you have misunderstood me. The employers view, it appears, is that they do not need the same amount of work that you currently deliver in your job to continue to be delivered in the same way, because they are creating a new role that includes this work and other work. If the employer thinks that they can easily do that and still get the quality of work they want, then that is a decision for them to make. What you do not have, and would be required to have to make the claim that you have suggested, is any evidence that this decision is driven by your age or reproductive status.

What is far more relevant a question is "are you the only creative director?" because that creates a foothold into an argument about selection. Or if other posts have similar duties, why isn't there a pool would be another good question. You are forming your argument from a conclusion - I am menopausal / had time off sick/ am working a reduced workload so those must be the reasons my post has been selected. And it may even be that those are the reasons - or at least a recognition byu the employer that they have a reduced requirement for the work in that role - but it is a leap to say that it is about you rather than about the post. If you end up challenging this in law, then your will be required to provide more than guesses and assumptions to even cross the first hurdle.

In law "work" and "posts" are not the same thing. Work frequently continues even after posts are made redundant. Arguing that the work is still required is again an irrelevancy - the employer can redistribute that work amongst others posts, and this is what they are doing. That's allowed. It's their decision. Your argument would need to be around why you are not simply being slotted in to that post - and again there may be good reason not to, but until the question is asked and a rationale presented it is impossible to prejudge whether it is fair in law or not.

And that last point is the crux of the matter. What is fair in law is a far cry from what might be judged as fair in the world. The cracks in the employers agument need to be legally based for you to progress them. If you can find a single piece of evidence that your menopause is the cause of the decision to make your post redundant, then that's great - you have a start on a decent claim. But you need that evidence. You can't just say it, you must prove it.

Thanks so much for your really helpful reply. I totally understand what you’re saying about what is fair in law etc and I know I probably haven’t got a leg to stand on, especially taking on the might of a huge company. I just feel I’m not up to the challenge at the moment with probably next to no chance of success and a whole lot of stress. I can’t help feeling sidelined though. I’m the oldest in the team by far and why would they want someone who’s causing them an issue by not being up to speed? I have 25 years experience, worked for years in New York and have won awards etc but it feels like i’m on the scrap heap. I need to digest what’s happened and will go armed with a list of questions when I meet with HR on Monday.

And if you take the emotion out of that - much as I get the emotion - you have a basis for questions. It's good to question if it is age related etc., but play a clever game. Don't be blunt, hint and query instead. Even if you end up with no case, it may make them back off if taking out one person is liklely to get too complicated.

If they are wrapping your job up with another job then doesn’t the person doing the other job also need to reapply? So it is not just you?

Just sounds like restructuring
there’s a lot easier ways like sick and performance to manage someone out of the business
redundancy is a lengthy legal process