BFP Reader Needs Free Legal Advice…

I have been working in a financial institution for ten years, I have been in my latest post with this company for two and half years. My superior told me that I have not been made redundant, but my job has been so! I am still with the company and actively working in a new role. More recently, an internal advertisement was placed for this latest role I am currently doing, however I was not short-listed for it. Now the job has been advertised externally, and I believe I am facing the sack.

I feel I have a grievance concerning my employment. Do we have any legislation here in Barbados which might be used to assist me in pursuing my grievance? I do not want to give more information at the present time, but would be interested in any readers’ comments here. Many thanks, BFP,  in advance for your time used in considering this issue, and if you decide to publish my post.


Filed under Barbados, Crime & Law

15 responses to “BFP Reader Needs Free Legal Advice…

  1. Rumplestilskin

    Firstly, I am not a lawyer, but from my experience your case looks like ‘constructive dismissal’ i.e. by having you languishing hoping for you to leave.

    However, if indeed they now sack you from the second role, then basically, you were made redundant and the company has not yet made your appropriate severance payment, by having you temporarily working in this other role.

    However, by working in this other role (for how long?) you accepted it in lieu of the first.

    Nevertheless, if they now fire you claiming that you are not up to it, the whole thing will smack of them trying to escape paying you for severance for the first role and look like a sham.

    If they sack you now you should still be entitled to the full severance based on your years of service from the first job etc.

    Your best bet is to go to an employment lawyer for advice.

    Best of luck.

  2. Rumplestilskin

    PS – By advertising a role in which you are actively working and accepted is, I believe, in of itself, constructive dismissal.

    Check with an attorney as to the best way forward.

    This relates to ensuring your correct severance, in the event that you are fired.

  3. Pat

    If your present job was advertised internally, it means that you were only there on a temporary basis and that you were not appointed to that position. You next move, if you like and wanted to stay in that position would have been to apply in writing for the job. They would have had to interview you or do other assessments of your suitablility and give you the results in writing. You would have been in an excellent position as they would have to justify why they continued to let you work in a job for 2 years that you could not do.

    I would suggest that if you want this particular job, you should apply for it now that it is advertised externally and speak to your manager about why they went outside when you are there working in the position. If the response is not to your satisfaction, then check with the labour act if there is one. If there is none get a good lawyer.

  4. Amused

    from the moment you were moved to the second new role, unless you agreed to the new job you are entitled to severance at your option

  5. Amused

    the fact that the employer admitted the job was redundant only further confirms that you are entitled to a cheque.

    normally in this type of situation, the employer given an option to take the money or accept the new job. Its your call

    In your case, you should be a little cautious they dont fire you from the second job but claim you agreed to move jobs without severance

  6. Amused


    employer GIVES an option

  7. Barbados Underground

    One bit of information which is missing from the submission is whether the workplace is unionized. It is a standard in collective bargaining agreements that any new job must be advertised internally and if no suitably qualified person is found then the company will advertise externally. The fact that the employee is currently occupying the new job usually would ensure he is a lock for the new job. The worrying sign for the employee is the company has decided to advertise the job externally. It obviously means two things 1)the company has two positions available and 2)this employee is not qualified to to the job.

  8. Tony Hall

    I get the impression that the job is not unionised otherwise there would have been union involvement. However he should have applied for the job once it was advertised whether he was shortlisted or not. He should however apply now with haste, and by law he has to be granted an interview. He would then stand a better chance of getting a better severance package if the company terminates him. It really looks like the company wants to get rid of him and methods are being used to frustrate him.

  9. Pat

    Tony Hall:

    I agree with you, but what would cause a company to want to get rid of an employee after ten years and still keep them employed in anothr position? I dont know how things work in Bim, but it seems strange. Whether he is appointed to the new job or not, when he separates he is STILL entitled to his severance as he is with the same employer. His employment with the employer is considered as ‘continuous’. Positions within the company has no bearing on the payment of severance (except for the amount $). He did not say whether he got a reduction in pay at this new job. That would be a hint that they wanted to be rid of him.

  10. SprayStarch

    i feel he shud communicate with others in the organization see how they feel. he can’t be alone in feeling slighted. maybe he can mobilize others to show the decision makers that they sit back and just take what ever they spoon out.

    BFP: can you get an answer from the writer as to whether he unionised and if the union has been notified?

  11. Vision Alert

    I am not a regular poster here, but I will declare I have knowledge of the person who first posted. She (not he) is unionised, and her union has been notified. Her union told her that she has to be sacked first before they can do anything. She did apply for the new post she is currently engaged in, but did not get an interview. She has been told that her employment in it is temporary, and due to be terminated on August 31st.

    I take this opportunity to thank all posters here, this has been very helpful to my friend.

  12. Pat

    Vision Alert,

    thanks for the additional information. She is in a good position. The union will do its work. She has nothing to fear, she will get her dues and more. Even if they have to train her for the new position or pay for upgrading. I worked in union ops in my workplace for a few years in the 1980’s and enjoyed it tremendously. Then, I joined a professional group; we had a union, but not as active as the previous one. Professionals are treated differently it seems.

  13. Vision Alert there is something missing. Any collective bargaining agreement makes it mandatory that if there is a vacancy in the organization which falls within the unit all applicants must be interviewed. If an interview is not granted then it gives rise to a grievance which must by heard based on a clearly described procedure listed in the collective bargaining agreement. This procedure would obviously involve the union which starts with input by the shop steward.

  14. Vision Alert

    Many thanks Pat for the encouragement. I found your post a little confusing, however, and I will try to explain my understanding of it. Please put me right if I am wrong!

    I think you are saying there are two possible outcomes here both as a result of her being unionised. If she does lose her temporary position (sacked) then she will get full severance from her first position, a position which she has already lost. Alternatively, the company could keep her on in the present position, with re-training as necessary. This second alternative seems, from the company’s point of view, sensible. She has been with them ten years, gets on well with her colleagues, and is very bright and intelligent. If the company appoint from outside, they suffer expense and time delay, and they would have to provide induction anyway.

    Of course, there may be other issues involved which I do not know about, and the company want to get rid of her anyway. In that case, I think she should take her severance pay, using it to help through a difficult time in her career. There will be greener pastures elsewhere.

    Thank you for your interest, Barbados Underground (are you the other blog!?), I do not know why she was not interviewed. I trust her union will pursue this.

  15. Vision Alert

    Sorry, BU, I just realised your username is a link to your blog! I thought for a moment that someone was trying to usurp your identity!