Redundancy Advice - Can I Request Previous Assessment Scores

[zerocool]

I've recently been made redundant and I'm not satisfied with the reasons given. I have asked my employer to provide my assessment results which they have but I have also requested my assessment from the first round of redundancies carried out earlier in the year to check for any inconsistencies/drastic change in score from 6 months ago. So far my employer has not refused but is questioning why I am asking for the previous assessment. It seems clear this is something they do not want to provide unless I explain why I need it.

My question here is, am I entitled to that information given that it was for a previous redundancy round? Is there any law which allows me to request this without question and if my employer refuses to provide this what are my options.

Thanks
Zack

[Canary42]

I would have thought that you were entitled to see all information on your personnel file.

http://dataprotectionact.org/5.html

[Hypognosis]

I am intrigued to note that they didn't even do you the courtesy of providing a copy of the first assessment to take home with you. Was it a thing where they let you read it but then took it back and put it on your file?

The employment tribunal might not read any significance into that and I can see why you, yourself, didn't see the need to ask for a copy: At the time, you had no reason to believe that there would be a second round of redundancies.

I can -sort of- see the employer's point of view as well. The first round selects out people on performance grounds and even Union membership cannot save them from that. The second round could be about the state of the company's finances and "even adequate and good performers have to go" so the selection criteria are -genuinely- different from the first round. They won't want to admit it but, for all we know, non-Union staff and the people with service short enough to make the rendundancy payout affordable will be the ones to go.

Sorry that this doesn't actually answer your question but there are 'rights' and there are "right thing to do"s. You've set down a marker, as if to say "I'm going to make you do this properly", which is admirable but maybe what they really want is compliant employees who don't ask awkward questions or cause them 'trouble'.

[ToraToraTora]

I'm confused here.

People are not made redundant, jobs are and thus the people doing them. As such you are not made redundant on the basis of an "assesment". If your assessment is poor then that's a different path to essentially being fired.

So can you clarify please.

[mccfluff]

TTT - for example

you have 6 people doing a job but the requirement is for 4 people, you assess the 6 and in theory the lowest scoring of the 6 will then become redundant

[ToraToraTora]

I see, fair enough, is that what's happenned here?

[emeritus]

I read it that Zerocool has been selected for redundancy based upon Competency Assessments carried out on 2 or more people doing the same or similar job. 1 or more of the jobs that zerocool was employed as have been declared redundant. Performance Assessments for selection for redundancy is a normal procedure in these circumstances.

[mccfluff]

by the sounds of it, it is.

i would guess that zack has been made redundant and someone else has kept their job who perhaps does not perform as well as zack perceived themselves to do (apologies to zack if thats not correct, its a guess based on experience of redundancies at our office)

[ubasses]

Even if you are entitled to see your previous assessment it will probably not help, as you cannot see the assessments of your colleagues for comparison. It could be that on the last round of redundancies you were last on the list to retain your position, with those performing lower being made redundant. This time if you all reached the same scores as previously in your assessments that would make you the one that is now in a redundancy position.

[tonywiltshire]

You need to study the Employment Rights Act 1996.

[Zacs-Master]

Or the employment act 2008 Sections 1-7, dispute resolution.

[Peter Pedant]

If your employer has a bit of paper with your name on it
then you can apply for it under the data protetion act
as a data subject access request and if they refuse then go to the Office of the Information Commissioner....

tell them they cant ask for the reason for the paper - under the law, the request is 'blind'

and they cant say we wont give it to you because we think you are gonna sue. - see OIC FAO

[factor-fiction]

^ Although knowing your own score may not help if you don't know the scores of others.

When it happened to me i was quite philosophical about it- I decided that if they decided i didn't fit into the future and were prepared to give me a lot of money to go I might as well go. It seemed a better option than trying to fight it and probably getting nowhere or just winning the battle but being made to feel unwelcome.

[zerocool]

Canary42 - Thank you for the link, I requested the information again from my employer without using the law, instead advicing I should be able to request the information without giving a reason. After nearly 12 hours they denied access once again. I am now considering filing a "subject access request" but this will make things messy and it's something I would prefer to avoid but it seems there is something they do not want me to see

Hypognosis - Only the person made redundant in the first round was allowed to see their assessment and since it revealed manager views it wouldnt have been ideal to pass that info to the remaining staff.

TTT - Yes that is whats happened

ubasses - I agree the previous scores have no relevance in this round and I am not looking to compare myself to my colleagues. I just want to see if there's been a significant drop from my previous score to now.

Factor-Fiction - I agree completely, I dont want to burn any bridges or leave in a bad light but it looks like it might be heading that way. I could give up and take what they are offerring but for me it's about correcting some of the inaccuracies in my review and addressing long standing issues.

Tonywiltshire and Zac-Master, thank you for your suggestions I will do my best to read what I can.

Peter Pendant - Thank you, that's really good information

To everyone thats commented, THANK YOU.

[tonywiltshire]

Perhaps you will be kind enough to inform us of the outcome?

[Hypognosis]

@zerocool

Any news?

//Hypognosis - Only the person made redundant in the first round was allowed to see their assessment and since it revealed manager views it wouldnt have been ideal to pass that info to the remaining staff. //

Well, I was far from suggesting circulation of people's assessments. That would be employee abuse (although, being behind the back of the person who went, they'd not know and thus not complain). I only expected that you'd been able to read and perhaps even sign off your agreement to your first round assessment.

You said you weren't allowed to see it, which makes your opening question slightly odd. How would you have any way of knowing that there had been a deterioration in your score if you'd not seen this first round report?

There's every possibility that the 1st round redundancies were singled out and the only place where everyone else's 'assessment' resides is inside the head(s) of management. If taken to tribunal by one of these 1st round people, they have the assessment on file. They'll hardly be required to produce assessment paperwork for all the employees they retained.

So, it maybe the reason they're being cagey is that you're requesting something which doesn't exit and may cost them a small amount of time/money/effort to type up. ;-)

[zerocool]

Update..

After I last posted on here I went back to work on the Monday and informed them I was entitled to all info held on myself and could request it informally or formally. Once again it was not provided and started to get pushy with regards to the compensation package provided.
My colleague informed me she had been told if I did not accept the package she could be in line for redundancy.

Hypognosis - this is where I think you might have a point in that assessments for others did not exist in this round of redundancies.

I spoke to a lawyer on the matter and they noted the assessment was not objective/ related to the role. Of the 10 criteria questions only one referred to the day to day role and others were measures on "drive", "interpersonal skills".

We went back and forth for days and without admitting so directly they implied the assessment was not correct.
Following that they increased the compensation package slightly and I ended up accepting as I did not want my colleague to be made redundant, additionally I did not want to leave on extremely bad terms as our world is so small and everyone knows each other.

It sucks in many ways but I've learned from this and moved but in time the truth will come out.