OK, I work 3 days, 12 hour shifts, as stated categorically in my contract of employment, it even states exactly what days I work.

We get a letter today stating they want to start a consultation to move this to the same hours split over 5 days, with a varying 8 hour shift pattern.

So……where do I go, so far they have not explained any options and this feels very much like constructive dismissal as they’ve been trying to get rid of this shift pattern for 5 years

Enter consultation, keep a note of everything – dates, agreements etc. Businesses can have good reasons for needing to change working practices etc. They haven’t tried to impose them on you – they’re asking to enter consultation, which sounds the right thing for them to do. So see what they’ve got to say…

Does that mean they want to go from a two shift system to a three shift one?

one shift (12-12 over three days) to three shift (12-8, 2-10, 4-12, over 5)

Consultation normally means they will keep telling you what they are going todo and not listen to anything you have to say. changes got forced on you but it’s OK because the consultation process was gone through. Do you have a union on site?
Just been through same process I now work an extra 240 hrs a year,travel an xtra 10 miles for less money. All pushed through before we could get union recognised on site.
I’m not planning on doing anything productive during the extra hours I’m at work

If they changed the contract materially then that’s ostensibly redundancy – the three day a week/12 hour shift pattern job will cease to exist and in its place will be a five day a week, eight hour shift job.

The consultation process is what you need to go through in order to bring about that change legally. You don’t have to take the new job and they don’t have to offer it to you, although in the latter instance they need objective reasons to base that on (so for example in role performance, attendance, punctuality etc). These reasons need to be consistently applied to everyone; you can’t pick and choose the criteria to selectively rule a person in or out.

Happened to us almost exactly a year ago, like Daz says they sit down and take notes but in the end ignore any points you make and just do what they want to regardless.
We still have this on our workshop door..

If they changed the contract materially then that’s ostensibly redundancy

WHAT ???
Its not redundancy its not even close 😯 Technically its,possibly, one sided material breach of the contract leading to a resignation which MAY be deemed to be a constructive dismissal/allow you to claim.
https://www.gov.uk/your-employment-contract-how-it-can-be-changed/dealing-with-problems

If an employer makes a change to a contract without getting agreement (including by using flexibility clauses unreasonably), employees may:

have the right to refuse to work under the new conditions
say that they’re working any new terms under protest, and are treating the change as a breach of contract
resign and claim constructive dismissal
be able to take a case to an employment tribunal

they don’t have to offer it to you, although in the latter instance they need objective reasons to base that on(so for example in role performance, attendance, punctuality etc)

Again WHAT
Its your job what you have described is a sacking/dismissed on lack of competence which they can do any time assuming they follow their procedures. Any HR Dept would be very nervous of doing this whilst forcing through a change of hours you object to as it will likely look like constructive dismissal ESPECIALLY if no issues have been documented before the change was announced.

There is a way for the company to force through the changes using a certain notice – I forget the name – and refusal to accept is termed as resignation not as constructive case.

WHo knows how your company will deal with it

Its not redundancy its not even close

Apologies if that’s incorrect.

I’m not sure how a material change in the requirements of the role are not redundancy? What then needs to change in order for a job to be regarded as elligible for redunancy?

Technically ROLES get made redundant not people
For example you work in a shop on the tills
The company remove all tills you are made redundant as the ROLE disappears
If they change your hours/opening times that is not making the ROLE redundant
Caps for emphasis not anger.

Caps for emphasis not anger.

It’s OK I wasn’t taking it any other way 😀

I think we are in violent agreement (and I do know a fair bit about the redunancy process).

So my question is this (and coincidentally it relates directly to the thread I just started on changing the contracted hours of our nanny):

What constitutes a ‘role’; what for example would happen in the following scenario:

You work in a shop on the tills. The company removes half the tills. The role of working the tills still exists but there is only a need for half the man hours.

You work in a shop on the tills. The company removes half the tills. The role of working the tills still exists but there is only a need for half the man hours.

The might have a consultation with options such as make x% of till people redundant, reduce hours of all till persons by x% (and pay as well) etc. At the end of the day if they get rid of half the tills they’ll get rid of half the till people’s wage bill one way or another.

what they said

Either agree to reduce all hours by 50% or use objective and fair * measures to decide who to keep and who to make redundant as you need less staff

Probably something between the two in the real world

* certain things cannot be used sickness record , length of service [ recent change iirc] usually they go for interview as you cannot prove who flunked and who did not and the company can pick and choose as it wished anyway but its deemed “fair”

certain things cannot be used sickness record

You can absolutely use sickness as a component in the selection process for redunancy.

Here

Either agree to reduce all hours by 50% or use objective and fair * measures to decide who to keep and who to make redundant as you need less staff

So the difference between this sitaution and one where the pattern of work is changing radically is what exactly?

Check the ACAS website – consultation over changing working practise for business reasons is a long way before the question of redundancy/ dismissal arises which can only arise once that process is complete. Perhaps the business ineeds to change working hours to suit customers or increase productivity? Might be good grounds for negotiating a pay increase rather than looking at the doom and gloom?

You can absolutely use sickness as a component in the selection process for redunancy.

MMMM Interesting
http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=3691
Acas seems to agree
It was used at ours around 2011 ish then not the next year as it was then illegal- we have never needed a matrix since then as they just interview. I am not sure if the law changed or guidance or it is changed back but my two minutes googling gave no definitive answer. As for today yes you are correct.

Seems length of service can as well- that was also illegal when we did it- but that is just age discrimination as how can a 23 year old compete with a 43 year old?
Tories changed the laws?????

So the difference between this sitaution and one where the pattern of work is changing radically is what exactly?[/qupte]

His role still exists it just need to be performed at a different time

its the difference between the shop getting rid of tills and changing opening hours. In the former they have no role + redundancy in the later they do = change of terms and conditions

As for today yes you are correct.

Very gracious of you Junky.

His role still exists it just need to be performed at a different time

I see this now. I think it’s the differene between when the hours are performed and how many hours are performed. If the total number of hours don’t change then it’s not redundancy, which I guess is what’s happening here.