[paulmort]

A friend of mine has been told that his position is possibly due to become "at risk" due to a re-organisation that means many people will go, but some can "transfer" or apply for jobs that are "different" to their current role

He asked me to enquire, is there a certain level of change in role where he then didnt have to apply (or could refuse) the new role without being put at risk as seen as resigning, thereby foregoing the redundancy package

Im told that the new role sees his responsibilities reducing from a team of 30 plus to a team of 13. Also he would now have to report to someone of the same level as him, whereas before he had autonomous control. It also means, so Im told, that this person even though keeping his management level , would be really working at a level below his current position

I hope this is making sense so far

Im told that my mate's proposed position would see him put "in the organisation chart" at the same level as people currently reporting into him, ie not even a lateral transfer but a perceived and probable demotion, even though keeping pay and benefits at the current level.

So his questions were:-
Do I have to accept the new role?
If he didnt, would it be seen as "resigning" thereby saving the Company the redundancy package?
If he did accept the new role and after the trial period it wasnt working (for him or the company) could he then still claim his redundancyor even claim constructive dismissal?

Im sure my mate still has loads of other questions, but as time is drawing short, these are the most pressing at this time

Help from all you Lawyers out there

Let me know and I'll pass your comments on
rgds

Mort