Role Changed

ziedth

HI all,

Not for me but just asking a quick question on behalf of a friend and wondering what the general feeling is. I won't go into too much detail but the more important points;

A chap started the role in maintenance about 6 months ago - Hard work but doing well, no reviews or anything.

His Back started to get a bit sore from using equipment and eventually very sore so had to take say 4 weeks off. Company-paid him a couple of weeks holidays and sorted his doctor visits during that time.

After the couple of weeks, he got a "fit to work" from the doc but before returning he was told that because he had complained that the tasks were giving him back issues that they couldn't put him back in the role and there wasn't anything suitable for him in the company. During the discussion, they did say that if a general operative role (less physically demanding work) became available they would give him a call but couldn't promise anything. That as it stands he was basically out of work and he should look for a new job.

They rang up the next day saying that they were going to offer him the general operative role and he could start it the next day.

He is annoyed that they are basically changing his role and wondering what his options are. I think he has refused to take the General Operative Role until he seeks legal advice from someone. I don't think he had much in the way of training as it a new role in a relatively new business (Just inductions etc).

My gut feeling on it is he really isn't at anything refusing to go back as he's still in the probationary period but any thoughts would be welcome.

Thanks.

JPup

Going purely on the details you’ve given it seems to me the company is being quite fair. Does he want to go back to the work that was causing him pain?

I’m assuming his pay has stayed the same when I say that.

Given he if there such a short amount of time I’d be surprised if he has much legal protection.

GerardKeating

ziedth wrote: »

They rang up the next day saying that they were going to offer him the general operative role and he could start it the next day.

At the same or reduced Salary?

One might argue that the company is following best practice, they had an employee in a role that caused him injury and harm, so they are seeking to move him to a "safer" role.

Leaving him in his previous role might lead them to some liability in the event of further back issue.

ziedth

JPup wrote: »

Going purely on the details you’ve given it seems to me the company is being quite fair. Does he want to go back to the work that was causing him pain?

I’m assuming his pay has stayed the same when I say that.

Given he if there such a short amount of time I’d be surprised if he has much legal protection.

Thanks, I thought that too. He's a good guy but prone to fly off the handle if he thinks he's being treated unfairly. Rate of pay and number of hours would stay the same but the maintenance role would be 9-5 while the general operative would be 2 shift. (He didn't sign any contracts as far as I know)

Dav010

As he has less than 12 months service and doesn’t have the benefit of protection from the Unfair Dismissals Act, I think they are being more than accommodating, and acting in his best interest, by offering him a role that is less likely to cause harm. I wouldn’t take to long to think about it.

OMM 0000

It sounds like this is a decent company with decent management.

As others have said, he's been there less than a year so his rights are weak.

The fact his previous role was damaging his back and causing him to miss a lot of work makes me think he really shouldn't be doing that job anymore.

If I were your friend I'd be grateful for the alternative opportunity.

He needs to realise most employers won't be this nice.

Supercell

I think in many companies he'd be out on his ear by now if still on a probationary. His employer sounds caring and responsible, he should be counting his blessings especially now with so many out of work.

GreeBo

What does he want, to keep the 2 shift role but not do any of the work due to his back? That seems unlikely to happen.
The company will have a sort back if they bend over any more for him imo.

Strumms

So he isn’t medically fit to continue in his current role.. at least to the point whereby that there would be a continuing risk to his health and wellbeing...

It sounds like his employer has been extremely fair and expeditious in proposing an alternative arrangement and role that would better enable his health and suit his health....

What more can they do ? Pay him to remain at home ? Watching Netflix...? Need to decide if he’s ok with the new arrangement or leave...