I'll try to keep this short but trying to get the full detail in.
Dh has worked for his current IT company for 5 years. 2 years ago they were bought out by a larger company but kept on as a separate part of the business (i.e. their work pretty much remained as before, kept company name etc.)
The company has a flat structure. So everyone except the management (who used to own the company before the buyout) has the same job title, I'll call this "general techie".
They've now announced there's going to be some redundancies. For the purpose of selecting redundancies they've split the company into four group, basically Managers, Analysts, Project managers, General techies. Dh still falls into the general techies group.
For quite some time now (a few years) dh has done Job A and Project B alongside other project work.
Job A - an internal job looking after servers, computers, general stuff like that. At times he's had odd people helping out if there was a lot of work on or when he's had holidays, paternity leave etc but dh is the main person doing this. Lots of this work was moved offsite after the buyout but dh still does a significant amount of it. This work will need to continue after the redundancies.
Project B - client project for which dh has been the main (only?) person doing it. Client has just signed a new contract for another year of work worth approx half dh's salary.
So, my question is:
Given that dh has been pretty much solely responsible for A & B and given that they will still be needed to be done after the redundancies, can dh still be made redundant just because his official job title is the same as everyone else in the company? Or is implied that his role is not redundant?
What I'm getting at is roles are made redundant not people and it seems dh's role is still going to be there after the redundancies....but of course his job title is the same as everyone else.