Question for employers
Discussion
OK. Here’s a question …
An employee is part of a team of people and he earns X. He’s fairly high up the pecking order in the team.
Recently he’s had a medical problem that means it’s probably not a good idea to continue in his present role.He’s carried on as normal for a few months since he brought the condition to his companies attention.
This is documented by the doctor etc. etc.
It now looks like a higher paid member of the team will be taking on his role and title and the employee will have his pay cut by X amount and he will be given a different title.
He has had his current position for over 2 years but it has never been recognised officially in a contract etc.
Can they legally just cut his wages like this ? It’s not a massive amount but he says it’s the principle.
He’s given the company loyal service for over 16 years.
An employee is part of a team of people and he earns X. He’s fairly high up the pecking order in the team.
Recently he’s had a medical problem that means it’s probably not a good idea to continue in his present role.He’s carried on as normal for a few months since he brought the condition to his companies attention.
This is documented by the doctor etc. etc.
It now looks like a higher paid member of the team will be taking on his role and title and the employee will have his pay cut by X amount and he will be given a different title.
He has had his current position for over 2 years but it has never been recognised officially in a contract etc.
Can they legally just cut his wages like this ? It’s not a massive amount but he says it’s the principle.
He’s given the company loyal service for over 16 years.
I think this is more for the Legal Eagles than Employers, but from My POV
If he was a long standing employee, whom had worked well, and thru no fault of his own, couldnt perform the work asked of him, AND, CRUCIALL... If The company could afford it without putting itself or others at risk..
then I would like to think that I would 'take care' of them... Reassign them into a managerial role, something less likely to agravate their role.
But, I can also see that there could be a time where I couldnt afford to Pay him, and the new guy the same rate.
In which case, obviosuly the continuation of the business takes priority over anything else.
How 'injured' is this person, Heart issues (ie no stress/long hours?) or just a broken leg.
Something that is likely to heal over time, or will he be 'broke' for ever?
Its a toughy, I love to reward loyalty, but I also have to safegaurd the other employeees.
GL to your Mate, I hope he has a speedy recovery
If he was a long standing employee, whom had worked well, and thru no fault of his own, couldnt perform the work asked of him, AND, CRUCIALL... If The company could afford it without putting itself or others at risk..
then I would like to think that I would 'take care' of them... Reassign them into a managerial role, something less likely to agravate their role.
But, I can also see that there could be a time where I couldnt afford to Pay him, and the new guy the same rate.
In which case, obviosuly the continuation of the business takes priority over anything else.
How 'injured' is this person, Heart issues (ie no stress/long hours?) or just a broken leg.
Something that is likely to heal over time, or will he be 'broke' for ever?
Its a toughy, I love to reward loyalty, but I also have to safegaurd the other employeees.
GL to your Mate, I hope he has a speedy recovery
Depending upon the nature of the medical problem, this may fall within the scope of the Disability Discrimination Act.
In the most simple terms, this says that employers are not allowed to discriminate against a person who has a substantial and long term disability (and 'disability' covers a wide range of impairments and illnesses, including things like mental health problems, heart disease etc. which don't immediately spring to mind as being 'disabilities') and, perhaps significantly for the case in question, that they must make reasonable adjustments to facilitate a person's employment.
These adjustments can include changing or omitting duties from a job specification, where appropriate, or providing additional equipment or facilities to allow someone to undertake a particular role.
>> Edited by Martin_S on Tuesday 1st June 20:03
>> Edited by Martin_S on Tuesday 1st June 20:04
In the most simple terms, this says that employers are not allowed to discriminate against a person who has a substantial and long term disability (and 'disability' covers a wide range of impairments and illnesses, including things like mental health problems, heart disease etc. which don't immediately spring to mind as being 'disabilities') and, perhaps significantly for the case in question, that they must make reasonable adjustments to facilitate a person's employment.
These adjustments can include changing or omitting duties from a job specification, where appropriate, or providing additional equipment or facilities to allow someone to undertake a particular role.
>> Edited by Martin_S on Tuesday 1st June 20:03
>> Edited by Martin_S on Tuesday 1st June 20:04
Martin_S said:
Depending upon the nature of the medical problem, this may fall within the scope of the Disability Discrimination Act.
In the most simple terms, this says that employers are not allowed to discriminate against a person who has a substantial and long term disability (and 'disability' covers a wide range of impairments and illnesses, including things like mental health problems, heart disease etc. which don't immediately spring to mind as being 'disabilities') and, perhaps significantly for the case in question, that they must make reasonable adjustments to facilitate a person's employment.
These adjustments can include changing or omitting duties from a job specification, where appropriate, to allow, or providing additional equipment or facilities to allow someone to undertake a particular role.
>> Edited by Martin_S on Tuesday 1st June 20:03
OK. But if they change the job description and title can they cut the wages ?
Cool_Blue said:
He has had his current position for over 2 years but it has never been recognised officially in a contract etc.
Can they legally just cut his wages like this ? It’s not a massive amount but he says it’s the principle.
He’s given the company loyal service for over 16 years.
As you state he does not have his current position in writing so therefore it is going to give him a problem. As Jamie states the company has to come first after all if that goes then everyone is stuffed.
Is there another position within the company where he could earn similar cash for another role?
D
As I understand it, any change in pay is a change to terms and conditions of employment and must, therefore be by mutual consent. The issue here is one of competance - is the employee capable of doing the job for which they are contracted (ignore whether the contract is in writing or implied)? If not then they can be removed from their existing role. If an alternative is offered, that will have its own terms and conditions.
That said, I would always test anything like this with my HR guys and, if the guy had given loyal service over that period, I would be inclined to swallow the cost of maintaining his existing package (provided it didn't create a huge disparity in his new team)
That said, I would always test anything like this with my HR guys and, if the guy had given loyal service over that period, I would be inclined to swallow the cost of maintaining his existing package (provided it didn't create a huge disparity in his new team)
Difficult one.
A good few years ago I worked for a big employer (I may have mentioned it before) and we had one guy on our team who had at some point in his career been promoted beyond his ability and been put back onto development work but with no reduction in salary. Since he was of the 'frequent knuckle-shuffle' persuasion he wasted no opportunity to let everyone know this.
Now in his case I'd say he was taking the piss and was affecting staff morale in his vicinity, so should have had his salary reduced. Especially since he was clearly not worth the salary he was on.
However, in the case of Blue's mate, where the change in role is brought about via ill health rather than competency (or lack of) then I'd say it is a bit tight to cut the wages.
>> Edited by JonRB on Thursday 3rd June 16:20
A good few years ago I worked for a big employer (I may have mentioned it before) and we had one guy on our team who had at some point in his career been promoted beyond his ability and been put back onto development work but with no reduction in salary. Since he was of the 'frequent knuckle-shuffle' persuasion he wasted no opportunity to let everyone know this.
Now in his case I'd say he was taking the piss and was affecting staff morale in his vicinity, so should have had his salary reduced. Especially since he was clearly not worth the salary he was on.
However, in the case of Blue's mate, where the change in role is brought about via ill health rather than competency (or lack of) then I'd say it is a bit tight to cut the wages.
>> Edited by JonRB on Thursday 3rd June 16:20
Cool_Blue said:
OK. But if they change the job description and title can they cut the wages ?
As a member of the Association of Professional Engineers (Part of big union AMICUS) i'd expect a BIG company to be
ed up hill and down dale by my unions legal team. This is why I pay 7 quid a month. It may be that your friend gets free legal advice with mortgage or similar ?
I'd say you are looking at redundency ( for which they have to prove it was fair )and re-employment (for which you have 3 months to say you don't want the new job)
An employment tribunal would grap their ballocks and rip them off.
Can mate prove it was a term of employment ? If yes, then anything but a minor change is redundancy which he can take and go elsewhere, or accept another offer within his currnt employer. If the latter, it will affect future rights e.g. next offer of redundancy will be based on new lower salary.
I expect his employer will argue it was always a temporary position reviewable monthly. If so, they can cease the extra, his core job is still as it always was.
I expect his employer will argue it was always a temporary position reviewable monthly. If so, they can cease the extra, his core job is still as it always was.
Cool_Blue said:
OK. Here’s a question …
An employee is part of a team of people and he earns X. He’s fairly high up the pecking order in the team.
Recently he’s had a medical problem that means it’s probably not a good idea to continue in his present role.He’s carried on as normal for a few months since he brought the condition to his companies attention.
This is documented by the doctor etc. etc.
It now looks like a higher paid member of the team will be taking on his role and title and the employee will have his pay cut by X amount and he will be given a different title.
He has had his current position for over 2 years but it has never been recognised officially in a contract etc.
Can they legally just cut his wages like this ? It’s not a massive amount but he says it’s the principle.
He’s given the company loyal service for over 16 years.
From what you've said the uplift in salary came with an increase in responsibility, so now that he is not able to carry the responsibility his uplift is no longer applicable. I take it that he is happy that the firm have continued to support him and keep him employed, so the principle is that he'd be getting paid for a job he's not able to do - why is that fair?
OTOH I'd like to think that as his boss I'd have some humanity in how this was approached and not just cut his salary/demote him without discussing it with him and HR first.
Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff