Could my redundancy be discriminatory?

[Bunny44]

I'm hoping to see if anyone here can help me with this. Sorry if it's a long one but it's hard to summarise essentially:

I've just been made redundant from a role I was in for 9 months after a male colleague was promoted above me.

There have been rounds of redundancies in my function the last 9 months but I was the only one this time, although more were let go in other functions. I was moved into this role 9 months ago as part of a new team due to restructuring. I'm in the UK but it is a global role reporting to the US. I've been at the company just under 2 years.

It was a senior manager role. 2 more junior roles were added a few months after me into the team, we all reported to the same manager though. My new manager asked me to guide the more junior roles and act as her right hand man and set up our team infrastructure which I did.

2 months ago a male colleague, also in the UK, with much less experience, but considerable bullshitting and political skills, who was at the same level as me previously in a parallel team convinced our new senior managers (above my manager) to create a new role managing the 3 of us. My manager had no say in this but admitted to me it was shit for me. He has considerably less experience than me in our field and industry, although he's been at this particular company longer (5 years), it's his first time in this sort of role whereas I've got 15 years in this specific industry and field and I was previously head a similar department at a competitor. I took an individual contributor role coming back off maternity leave, whereas my last roles have been more senior and managing teams.

The new role created for him was not advertised and nobody in our team was consulted. I found out that it was almost not approved due to our head of department flagging it for lack of compliance but some how it got positioned as an internal promotion and signed off. If advertised I definitely would have applied and had considerable experience for it from my roles previous companies and in my current role at the company. The role also wasn't really necessary as my manager in situ didn't have that many direct reports and putting him there has kind of created a duplication of work of what I was doing. I immediately became concerned for my role as I knew he'd throw me under the bus if he got a chance as he's all about self promotion and preservation.

Working for him has been really shit as he's not used to managing senior people and micro managed us and was very patronising (I.e. using AI to send me a 15 step guides on how to do a basic parts of my job on a daily basis, also attempting to gate keep strategic projects that are supposed to fall under my remit).

I was told on Friday my role was being made redundant because they're consolidating roles to the US. But then they admitted not all roles were being redundant from our team in the UK, which means only I got made redundant and he got to keep his role. I don't understand how this whole situation has been allowed to happen.

As it happens I was anticipating this so had been doing interviews and already got an offer the same morning - but I felt forced out. My current company offered me redundancy pay of 2.5 months including one months notice but I'm left feeling like this is a highly unfair situation and possibly even sex discrimination considering that a male colleague was given a non advertised role which has caused my role to be made redundant.

Also worth noting I got a really good performance review and a rise 4 months ago so this wasn't performance related.

How can you prove they didn’t see something in him? It’s not best practice to promote without allowing others but honestly, why would you want them to put you through that if they had already decided who they want? I’ve been through that and it sucked - what a waste if time and the outcome would be the same. They wanted him in that role and well done him playing the game well. That’s not discrimination, it’s just shitty/toxic behaviour. Sounds like you’re well out of it. Onwards op, with your head up. We are all just numbers on a spreadsheet.

You have less than two years' service and no employment rights.

If you hold a senior role, why is your notice period only one month?

You have another job. Move on.

He didn't actually have the right skills and experience though and that has been shown up several times when he's not understood several aspects, because he'd never actually done that role, even though he had a similar sounding previous job title. He's made mistakes because he assumes he knows things without speaking to us first.

The new managers who took over our function aren't familiar with what we do and didn't consult my manager, who would have been able to explain the difference between what we do and what he was doing previously.

The thing is my new manager specifically asked us not to talk to the new heads of department while the dust settled from the re-org whereas he made a point of networking with them and doing things for them. I spoke to one of them once at an event and my manager freaked out about it. I would have liked to position myself as well but I didn't want to upset my manager.

I think it would be hard to prove this and you’d be spending precious time on this, only for it to happen again in a few months. Well done for foreseeing the redundancy and finding another job and good riddance to the old one.

In my industry one month is standard. They're American firms.

I don't want to stay, but I'm wondering whether to flag it with my legal counsel as to be honest it's not the first time I've seen this sort of thing happen in our industry and feel like if no one flags it then it keeps happening.

No this isn’t discrimination. It may not be fair or best practise but your company hasn’t actually done anything wrong for what you have said.

Companies can promote without advertising even if it is their policy. Happens all the time. Not great practise but not discrimination.

You may not think he is capable but it isn’t your call. And while he wouldn’t be the first incapable manager to be promoted it isn’t discriminatory just because he has convinced someone he is good for the role.

You have also been there less than two years so they can just get rid of you. The fact they are giving you a package is a positive thing. You are easy to get rid of that way.

Honestly there is absolutely nothing to suggest anything untoward legally and I think you will just look like someone bitter for being made redundant (and as it isn’t personal as there have been rounds of recent redundancies you will also just seem a bit silly).

i would take the money, learn from it and move on.

You’ll not really achieve anything by taking it further. You were in the role for less than two years. You already have another job.
you feel sidelined and bothered that someone more senior is micromanaging you. Even if you weren’t made refit it would be time to move on. Don’t give it any more headspace.

Ok thanks just wanted to get other perspectives. We have to get legal counsel and I've got coverage through my home insurance so I'll mention it to them but I'll assume there's nothing that can come of it.

Posters saying you have no rights before 2 years, I thought they changed that recently?

I’d be on the phone to ACAS in the morning

it sounds really shitty but I’m pleased you have secured another role

You have rights from day 1 for discrimination. Sounds dodgy op - i think you’re not going to turn this around. However I would query it - just to put the frighteners up them and give them a bit of HR stuff to go through. You might boost your settlement, who knows.

You don't have "no employment rights" because you've got under two years' service.

You do have the right not to be discriminated against, among dozens of other rights.

The two years service requirement for basic unfair dismissal changes to six months from January.

I would do it just to prove a point, but I’m petty

I also think it's worth querying.

People saying "it's not discrimination, it's just bad practice", well, it could be both!

The OPs role suddenly being redundant doesn't really make sense here. What was the business case for the redundancy?

Why are they paying her redundancy pay they don't need to pay? Are they asking for a settlement agreement to be signed then? If so, my standard advice to anyone offered a settlement is to ask did double what they're offering. Their offer is only a starting point.

Whoever said she would "make herself look silly" - who cares about looking silly??

The "no employment rights" is BS.

I don't see any discrimination from what you've said. It does sound like there's potential to dispute his appointment if they didn't advertise it - but I'm not sure how far you'd get and it's a pointless fight. I'd take the redundancy but be careful that it isn't subject to any gardening leave.

Yes they're asking for a settlement agreement to be signed.

Would querying the reason for redundancy help to increase the offer or could they withdraw it?

They said the business reason was to consolidate to the US, yet they retained my new manager who is UK based. They also retained another lady also in the UK in the wider team. So I was the only one laid off as part of this 'consolidation to the US' so it makes little sense.

Sorry this happened to you- thats shitty behaviour. But legally they haven’t done anything wrong, but I would still advise you to raise a
grievance before your employment there ends- they have a legality to investigate then, and I can promise you, after investigations, they will raise your settlement and a half hearted apology for poor work relationships or some BS like that and ask you to accept. Accept the raised settlement and then leave- no more. They wont find in your favour but will want it to be closed swiftly as these things are sooo time consuming and require so many departments snd emails etc- currently investigation one myself and just the legalities surrounding everything make everything 10x longer! Good luck in your new job

I’m not sure it’s much you would ever prove, but one option is to try to suggest there are issues and you want the 2.5 months but to be able to leave in a week to go quietly, then start the new job and bank the payout.

If the redundancy was solid, why would they need a settlement agreement to be signed?

I would a) ask for the business case in writing, and b) say you'll sign for five months pay and garden leave for your notice period. The worst they can do at this stage is say no. Then you revert to what they've offered.

But you could always try "make me redundant, fine, but I'm not signing anything, why should I?" And see how they react.

You do have employment rights, but not as many as you would have with 2 years service. The poster who said you have no rights is wrong.

As there is a settlement agreement on the table, whether what has happened was unfair or discrimination doesn't matter unless you choose to reject the settlement. They should have offered to pay for a lawyer to advise you on the agreement as it is not binding on you unless you have received independent legal advice. Your solicitor will be able to advise whether you would have a claim to take to tribunal and what you might get if you won. You won't get as much in a settlement agreement as you would from a successful tribunal claim, but you avoid the stress and the possibility of losing and getting nothing.

What you have described (a male employee being promoted over you without the role being advertised and you now being made redundant) doesn't immediately sound like discrimination, but a solicitor who specialises in employment law will be better placed to advise.

As there is a settlement agreement on the table, taking it is likely to be your best option. However, if you only have their first offer it is likely you (or your solicitor) will be able to negotiate an improved offer.

If they want you to sign a settlement agreement they must advise you to seek legal advice on it and, importantly, they must pay for this advice. Don’t use household insurance for this. The solicitor will advise you if the deal offered is fair and will push for more for you if appropriate. If your employer does not comply with this requirement the agreement signed would not be legally binding on you.

If they have offered you a settlement I would take it and move on.

It sounds like a shit company to work with and a bully manager so you are better off somewhere else.

Discrimination would be hard to prove and it take something like 2 years to get in front of an employment tribunal as there is a backlog of cases.

Better to focus your energy on arguing for the best possible financial settlement and reference you can get and seek legal advice to help you negotiate the right amount.

How much compensation are they offering as part of the settlement?

it sounds extremely messy and with a maternity leave and the female
employer being selected for redundancy with what appears to be little process you could potentially make a case for sex discrimination. I would absolutely be speaking to a solicitor and aiming to negotiate 6 months money

All redundancies from us firms are settlement agreements normally. You’ve 9 months, they don’t even need to do redundancy, they can look you in the eye and say good bye and that’s it.

as for him not being suited to the role in your opinion and you better for it, the reality is they clearly feel the opposite, as hard as that is to stomach,

you can refuse to sign the settlement, but you will then go to stat redundancy, and you will then need to go to tribunal and prove you’re better for the job than him and then prove they didn’t give it to you as you are female and he only got it as a male.

no lawyer wil tell you this is a good idea. And even in the very long shot you won, after 9 months you’re unlikely going to get more than you already are.