I have officially lost my job today.........

[Nudga]

due to me being one of the youngest of four who started on the same day five years ago. I have already started grievence proceedures stating age discrimination, let battle commence.

Show me solidarity and love people.

[coventryrover]

That is   shitty reason.  Do you have the reason in writing or witnesses to the verbal communication?

[Mark DRFC]

good luck mate, give em hell!

[coventryrover]

That is   shitty reason.  Do you have the reason in writing or witnesses to the verbal communication?

[Nudga]

coventryrover wrote:

That is   shitty reason.  Do you have the reason in writing or witnesses to the verbal communication?

Oh yes, the minutes were taken by some odd bod in the corner and I had three union guys there. ACAS reckon i've got a good case against them.

[Filo]

Nudga wrote:

due to me being one of the youngest of four who started on the same day five years ago. I have already started grievence proceedures stating age discrimination, let battle commence.

Show me solidarity and love people.

As a former Trade union rep, I can tell you age cannot be a reason for selection in a redundancy situation, my advice to you is contact ACAS on their help line 08457 47 47 47 for advice


Also have a read of this http://www.yourlegalrights.co.uk/employment/age-discrimination-and-redundancy

[Filo]

Who do you work for?

[Nudga]

Cheers Filo, I rang ACAS this afternoon and they basically backed me up. I work for Network Rail, the smug head honcho who took the meeting said they could do it under an agreement from the old British Rail days with the Unions back in 1981. So I flung one back saying that an agreement isn't law abiding, especially one as old as that. He couldn't come back with anything so I told him that I would start a greivance proceedure as soon as we were done, that got him a bit flustered.

[Filo]

Nudga wrote:

Cheers Filo, I rang ACAS this afternoon and they basically backed me up. I work for Network Rail, the smug head honcho who took the meeting said they could do it under an agreement from the old British Rail days with the Unions back in 1981. So I flung one back saying that an agreement isn't law abiding, especially one as old as that. He couldn't come back with anything so I told him that I would start a greivance proceedure as soon as we were done, that got him a bit flustered.

I would think the discrimination act would over ride any trade union agreement, as the discrimination act is law, the old agreement, if there is one, should have been ammended when the discrimination act became law

[Nudga]

ACAS did say that the 2006 act superseeded(sp) this old agreement. I reckon i've got a good case when it comes to a tribunal.

[jucyberry]

Much love and solidarity coming from over here Chris, that has to be the most pitiful reason I have ever heard..I read today that from October it will be illegal to force someone out at retirement age so why should relative youh work against you either?... What works one way should work the other..
Do they give you a time frame at all for this tribunal to be heard? I hope it's resolved as soon as possible.

 Give the bas**rds hell..

[Dutch Uncle]

Good luck from me too Chris

I know it must be a tough time for managers to make decisions, but this does realy seem wrong, ill thought through, and potentially laying themselves open to all sorts of valid appeals.    

My advice for what it is worth is to proceed firmly but carefully; don't burn bridges until necessary

[Ian H]

Good Luck in the defence .....

I concur with our Netherlands relative - proceed carefully and don't let it get personal.

Over the past 12 months I have been \"AT Risk\" 3 times, but with discussion and Employee Consultation I am still in a post.

Good Luck, and in all honesty if your appeal succeeds it will no doubt mean that someone else has to suffer, but if they're not Rovers fans they clearly aren't as worthy as yourself ... hope all goes well.

[Savvy]

Nudga wrote:

due to me being one of the youngest of four who started on the same day five years ago. I have already started grievence proceedures stating age discrimination, let battle commence.

Show me solidarity and love people.

Is the reason for your dismissal redundancy by any chance?

[Nudga]

Savvy wrote:

Nudga wrote:

due to me being one of the youngest of four who started on the same day five years ago. I have already started grievence proceedures stating age discrimination, let battle commence.

Show me solidarity and love people.

Is the reason for your dismissal redundancy by any chance?

Looks that way Savvy, for the moment i am being put in \"Displacement\", which means they can and will use me to best advantage anywhere down the East Coast and with any discipline. Under agreement with RMT, no redundencies will take place this year, but everyone will be under review again in October. In the mean time, I have to be seen to be applying for jobs within Network Rail, jobs i don't want and jobs that will probably non-existent in 2012. I reckon they are prepared to take a few hits from guys like me, see how far they can take it. It wouldn't surprise me if they try to settle this before it gets ugly i;e £££££s, because that by all accounts is NWR way.

[Nudga]

And thanks guys but I have made this a personal issue with the guy in question because I find it difficult to stomach his flippent way of telling me that I no longer had a job with the Electrification department, and the massive f**k off grin which he displayed on his face............right up until the point I embarrassed him in front of his peers and I had him stuttering over the gash he made with the reason behind the decision to get rid of me and another lad. I even made a huge point in asking for a leaflet for Care First, which is a counciling service. Up here for thinking, down here for dancing!

[Savvy]

The reason I ask Chris is because the way they handle things has to be considerably different if they are making you redundant rather than taking other approaches.

Just for your information, my own son has been part of this process and like yourself is to be \"used to best advantage\" what ever that expression means. He had been with the fault team underneath the power box but it would appear that he may now have to spend time with the new works teams and or travel to Retford.

He's told me of one situation that I find interesting, that of a clerical grade lassy who has been catagorised with the track chargemen, and has retained her post, but now has to undergo PTS training and go out on the track and work with the lads in a supervisory capacity. That can't be right and perhaps is something Carlo...oops I mean the LDC/Union should have picked up on.

Now I don't know the full details of whats happened, but here's my little stab in the dark as to how it will play out and what NR are up to.

You may well be aware that there are 5 potentially fair reasons for dismissal of employees which are;

Conduct
Capability
Illegality
Redundancy

and the wonderful catch all phrase,

\"Some other substantial reason\"

My guess is that this is the reason that they will use, because its one that is often used where there are economic, technical, and organisational
reasons entailing a change in the workforce that require
the dismissal of an employee.

NR will claim that due to business efficacy, they wish to make a reduction in staff numbers because they believe that there will be, or is likely to be a reduction in demand for employees of your type.

Now its worth noting at this point that an Industrial Tribunal is not like a court of law insofar as the court will not seek to find out who is right and who is wrong, the only question the tribunal will ask it's self is given all the circumstances, has the employer acted reasonably and is this the type of action a reasonable employer would take.

Now this is where the due process that you and the others including my lad have been through comes into play. NR will claim that they have put a procedure in place in agreement with local representatives of the employees and that the criterion agreed with the employee representatives has been applied fairly and rigorously. It would appear that employees have been banded together according to their salary, and that length of time served has been used to determined a \"Last in, first out\" policy.

Not what you what to hear, but I think as you say there maybe more twists to this one!!!

[Nudga]

I think what they are trying to do is make life as difficult as possible so the lads leave under their own steam and take volentary redundency, which is of course cheaper for NWR. Like i said, I have to be seen to be applying for other jobs because if i don't then that will go against me. Also, i have to go back into this whole scenario again in February for round two of the slotting process. They may have another job for me to take, and I will have no choice but to take it. But again, that job will come under review again in about October. Basically, it's a stay of execution.

[Savvy]

Judging by the look on our young un's kipper this evening, their not doing a bad job in the demoralisation stakes. He's got to use a bit of fox pie though, because he's tied in to a two year clause that became part of the agreement when he joined NR. They basically paid his second and third year tution fees at Sheffield Hallam, gave him a pro rata salary and a few other add-ons such as a laptop in return for an agreement to remain with them for two years following his graduation.

He gets married this year so he could have done without the trauma, but I've told him to relax and see how it all pans out!

[Nudga]

We were told that graduates were safe because they were future management material, this came from a meeting with Steve Featherstone.

[Savvy]

Mmm...interesting I'll pass that one on! I think he sometines gets abit perplexed because the graduates by and large get the rubber ear of some of the lads. Its a pity really because he worked on the shovel most weekends whilst he was on his course and was a COSS in his own right before he started at Hallam!

[DadsleyRover]

Sorry to hear about your news but keep in control and and don't get angry. Keep your dignaty.

Good Luck.

[Thinwhiteduke]

What a bunch of bas**rds.

Good luck in your battle....though it should beone you will easily win. After all, like others have said, if their key reason for making you redundant ahead of others is due to age, it is indeed discrimination...and therefore illegal.

[Muttley]

Good luck Nudga, as others have pointed out, age CANNOT be used as the prime reason for selecting an individual for redundancy, although it may be used as a final factor if ALL other scores have come out equal (attendance, skills etc) - as you obviopusly know, they are on very shaky ground if what you say is true.

Just a thought...you may want to consider what you're putting on here about the situation as you may be bound by some confidentiality clauses in your T&C's, particularly any personal comments about the management team.

[BobG]

Absolutely spot on Muttley. Keep stum Nudga. PM people if you have Q's to ask or comments to make.

Although the specified reason for the chop is silly, management these days can make it impossible to stay - anywhere. If the going gets tough for NR, I'll bet you a lunch that there will be a big re-organisation and everyone they wnat to push out will have to apply for a reduced pool of jobs. Then they can demosntrate that they've been fair, that they're acting in the best interests of the business and that if you don't take VR, they can push you out. It happens about once every 2 years in BT you know. There's another go at it going on right now.

So, good luck with the case. Follow Dutch Uncle's advice - that's REALLY important that is and don't give them even a teeny reason with which they can accuse you of breaking the rules. That's the green light to a disciplinary based dismissal - and no one will fight for you then.

Good luck

BobG

[Townender]

Good luck and all the very best to you mate.

[Sandy Lane]

Nudga, I'd like to add my best wishes as well and hope the situation is resolved soon.

[Nudga]

Thanks for the support brothers and sisters, and the advice is much appreciated and I will take that all on board.

One thing that will drag this on is the fact that they could offer me a job (albiet a shit one) which I would have to take and then they will review that again in October, and probably get rid of me for good but with a different reason i;e This position is no longer needed because of sufficient man power.

Thanks again guys.