Is this a legal redundancy - big 4

[ohreallywhatnow]

So I was given a secret heads up that I am going to be told my Director role is redundant due to span and control.

I report to another Director (which isn't allowed any longer and also I have no Senior Managers reporting to me) who agrees I do Director level work and my role needs Director level capabilities. He's also given me the highest performance ratings it's possible to get every 3 months for nearly 3 years.

Apparently they are going to offer me the exact same role and responsibilities as a Senior Manager and ask me to take it or be redundant. Initially it was supposed to be with a pay cut but I'm told they are trying to get an exception for me to keep the pay but I'd have to take the lower grade, get the lower grade bonus and no pay rises.

To anyone who knows, is this legal please?

They can certainly offer you the change of job title and conditions and you can take it or turn it down.

Impossible to say if they can go for redundancy without knowing details of your role and how it differs from other directors. Remember you don't make a person redundant you make a position redundant.

@Aaron95 true but the role will be the exact same role managing the same people and responsibilities I've had for 3 years.

Just lower title and possibly lower pay (or not if they get some exception signed off.)

Yes it is legal. They might struggle to simply downgade the existing job, but offering you one of two options will satisfy legal requirements and they seem to be consdiering both options:
(a) They can make you redundant following a re-evaluation of your post in which the grade is reduced and you refuse accept it
and/or
(b) they can reduce the grade of the post following a re-evaluation and you continue in position but with a protected salary. You should be aware that in this case the salary protection could be time limited - so you need to check the terms. 18 - 24 months is nor unusual, but 12 months may also be an option. In terms of salary protection there is no formal legal guidance to follow, so only a tribunal can decide if it is reasonable or not, but I would suggest that anything from 12 months up would probably be deemed acceptable. The rationale is that the salary protection is not designed to keep you on a higher level of pay for ever, but that it maintains your income whilst you find another job. At the end of the protected period, if you are still in post your salary reduces and you are deemed to have accepted that. Occasionally the reduction may be phased in over time as well, but that is not as common.

Of course there is nothing to stop them protecting your salary for ever, but frankly they would be idiots for doing so, since that invalidates the point of reducing the grade in the first place.

If they are protecting your pay but saying that type of role ie reporting to director is not considered a Director role any longer then I'm not sure it's worth fighting. If you are unhappy in the role then look for another job

Thanks everyone.

If they reduce my salary I'll definitely have to look for a new job and let them make me redundant.

I may not take it even on the same salary as looking for a new job as a Senior Manager rather than a Director will make obtaining the right level role harder (and nobody would believe it wasn't a demotion due to poor performance!)

I'm feeling very upset by the whole thing really.

Hi sounds like my conversation today! My role told to be at risk today! Im wondering if they’ll try and offer me a job at a lower grade!

@Firsttimeinmylife sorry to hear that. It's really rubbish.

I may not take it even on the same salary
I perhaps didn't cover that possible eventuality clearly enough. If it is the same salary and you refuse it, you are not entitled to redndancy pay. You resign with nothing. That doesn't mean they won't pay it - but legally they don't have to. And possibly even on the reduced salary too. That latter is more complicated because tribunals have upheld withholding redundancy payments where a post has been reduced in salary or the alternative offered is less pay. It would come down to whether the tribunal thought that your refusal was reasonable, and there is no independant test for that. within a 10% reduction there is a high chance of you losing, but there have been occasions where as much as 15% has been deemed fair in law. The problem you face in these circumstances is that there is a default towards the position that it is unreasonable to refuse a reduced salary when that gives you an income in order to look elsewhere if the alternative is looking elsewhere from the dole queue. It is tough to contest that argument so I would advise legal advice if you are seriously considering refusing unless the employer has said they are willing to let you go with redundancy pay. It depends how "hardball" they want to play it.