I want to keep details vague but I work in the public sector and have been middle-management for a few years. Last year I was promoted to a senior role but had to keep my middle leadership post alongside it. I was happy with this initially because I felt if things didn't work out in the senior role I could step back quite easily.
Things went well and about 6 months ago my boss told me she would like to make my senior position permanent, move it up notch or two on the pay spine and remove my middle leadership post entirely. I was very happy with this plan, which she said would take place in the new year (so by now!).
In the meantime, there have been some budget cuts and other stuff going on in the organisation and she is now saying I can still move up but will really need to keep the middle role and will not have the pay rise - to be clear, I received a pay rise when I moved up, but was 'promised' another one when I left ML altogether but she is now saying that if I keep doing both roles, I won't be eligible for a pay rise, even though I would have been had I just moved to doing the more senior role, which I will now still be expected to do anyway! So being paid less to do more.
I am struggling with this. I can see the reasons why it has come about, which mean that I can't just leave my department, and I'm happy to help out my organisation until another solution can be found. But I don't see why I shouldn't be paid for that and I am struggling with the workload of both roles. A couple of other people were in a similar position but one has decided to step back down and the other is able to move up as I should be, simply because there are different circumstances in his department, even though he has actually done less than me in his new post and hasn't got to juggle two anymore like I have.
Any idea of what my rights are in this situation would be much appreciated.