Fang

If you were hired by a large UK company for a senior job based in another country, then you found out after you started that there is another person based in the UK head office who has the same job title as yours and has been doing a similar job to yours for the past few years from the UK. Then you were given the option of either a. making that person redundant or b. having that person in your team reporting to you. Which would you choose? a or b?

Sue

Which would you choose?

pennylessinindia

can you work with the person if so go for b

nun

If those are your only options I'd resign myself. The company sounds messed up. Someone in management should have hired you either as a replacement or to manage the person with the same job description as you.

expo09

This isn't very well explained so don't really understand the situation. Is he doing the same job you are doing now (but in the UK)? Why would you need to make him redundant?

killerhales

What has this got to do with moving back to the UK?

A person's role is redundant when that role no longer needs to be performed.
A person who is in a redundant role either ceases employment with their particular company (and gets compensation) or if they are valuable to the company then other role options within that company are explored.

If this person is valuable to your company then retaining him/her should be a priority. If not, then redundancy is the best option (if the role is truly redundant).

From your brief explanation it seems like you have been hired to do the role that this person is doing (albeit in another location) and enable the company to make him/her redundant.

As the previous poster said, doesn't make your company look good.

If you end up with a redundant employee, please treat them with respect and consider their wellbeing to the maximum extent possible.

mbike

C.) Resign. If you are good enough to get a senior job in this company, you are certainly good enough to get a senior job in a company that treats its employees with respect and recognises that it can't play politics with people's lives. Remember, three or four years down the line this could happen to you in exactly the same circumstances.

brissybee

Ditto. Unless they will screw you over, in which case, A. If you have trusted contacts who work with the person facing the flick, you could get them to sound the person out as to what they might want. If close to retirement, they might appreciate a nice payout, on their terms, without loss of face.

sallysimmons

Impossible to say without knowing the situation, the company, and the person you might lay off.

Fang

Thank you for all your replies.

I am actually the person based in the UK facing redundancy. I posted this question because I wanted to understand why the new hire based abroad doesn't want to work with me and want to make my role redundant.

I have been working for my current employer for nearly six years based in the UK. My job is mainly business development in the said country and I have done a fantastic job, nobody could deny it. Last year the Board decided to appoint a director based in the said country because the market is strategically important. I didn't apply for the role because I didn't want to uproot my family (kid's schooling etc) and I believed I could still carry on doing my job based in the UK.

I have been told now my job is redundant because the new director's view is that he can do all my jobs and he doesn't see a role for me based in the UK, even though I have said I am happy to report to him (currently we report to the same line manager).

Can you guys help me to understand why he is doing this and what he gains by getting rid of me? Is he feeling threatened by me? I am in my mid 40s so am certainly not happy to be paid to retire.

Beedubya

Very sorry to hear about your redundancy.

I can see you are very new here, do you realise this is a forum for British expatriates and you are posting in the section called "Moving Back To The UK?"

killerhales

If he can do all your work then indeed your role is redundant.

What does he gain? That's pretty obvious, the cost of employing you!

I don't think you meant it that way, but if they are really going to pay you enough to retire then take the money and run!

Anyway, looks like it's time for you to negotiate the best package that you can. Good luck!

mbike

This sort of thing is all too common these days. Have you been following this story in the papers?
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...al-millions.do

Robbo25

Having worked in this type of environment before, I can understand why it would happen.

If you have done a great job, and it would seem you have, then once an area becomes increasingly important it needs people on the ground especially in sales. Additionally, the locals generally prefer to deal with a local.

Sorry to say, but the job you had was always likely to go in the longer term, either because the sales didn't come in and it wasn't worth doing or because they did and they needed someone local.

There is not only the cost of paying for you, but there is the travel costs, the fact that timezones etc make it less efficient, and wages in the UK may be higher than the country referred to.

mbike

If the company is uk-based, they should be following uk best practice. This would usually involve seeing if you can be employed elsewhere in the organisation prior to redundancy. Also, have they made it clear exactly what the criteria for the selection process was? They will usually offer to pay for you to talk to an employment lawyer as part of the consultation process.

You still haven't explained why you are posting here, though. Having done the job for six years in the UK, you're hardly a new re-arrival.