appealing redundancy

[redundant]

Sorry, I seem to be taking over this board at the moment...i need a bit of hand holding if anyone is available!

So, I am appealing a decision to make me redundant (I applied for 3 new posts created in a restructure and was unsuccessful). One post in particular I was an excellent (I think) match for and my application form showed that I met everything asked for on the job description and person spec.

I have finally been given feedback as to why i was unsuccessful - its basically a couple of sentences for each job, saying I didn't demonstrate various bits (which I think I did by the way, apart from one job that I agree with them on). I have asked to see more detailed scoring, as surely just saying 'so and so didn't demonstrate x, y and z' is very subjective? My career history and application form demonstrates it in my opinion.

Any advice as to how to tackle this hugely welcome. So far I have gone through my application form and cross checked it against the job description and person spec, marking exactly where I demonstrate each point. Does that sound right? Anything else? I have to write an appeal letter, and want to get it right.

I think your first point of appeal is simply the general one that you feel that your redundancy was unfair as you feel you should have been offered at least one of the posts.

Then go through the posts as you have suggested and demonstrate that you fulfil all the central criteria. Flag that the requriement is that it is a suitable alternative vacancy, and you believe it is. This isn't necessarily the same as saying you would win against external candidates.

Do by all means ask about scoring, but do you know for a fact that they scored people?

Are there any reasons you wouldn't get the job, like personality clashes?

Do you have any other issues, like your selection to be placed at risk, that you want to cover, or is it literally the fact that you didn't get the new roles?

thanks everso. Its literally the fact I didn't get the role, as I can't really argue with the selection as it was a restructure. Several people in same boat as me, think its a case of out with old, in with new, but no one really understands it.

I have asked about the scoring. They intimated at the interview that they were doing something along the scoring line, as they had someone from HR sat in

ok, i have my scoring back - and almost wish i hadn't. They have scored me insultingly low - 3 out of 10 for skills. it makes me both and - its such a stitch up. I have a qualification from the industry leading body and a lot of completely relevant career experience. I honestly have the skills but it seems so subjective - if they say i haven't what can i do?
I can't see a tribunal, unless it has an expert on the panel that knows my field of work, will be able to see my argument - its just looks like my word against theirs.