Covering two roles

Ask the experts / 23 November 2011

Tony has been covering a vacant role as well as his own while a replacement is recruited. His boss has joked that it’s ‘not worth’ finding a replacement as Tony is doing ‘such a good job’. While Tony has relished the challenge, he feels the workload of both jobs is too much long term. What can he do?

Michael Ball, Employment partner, Gateley

It’s not uncommon for employees to take on extra work to cover for a colleague who is temporarily absent or where there is a gap between one employee leaving and a new employee starting. When and if an employee agrees to cover the extra work in these situations, it will be on the basis that this is only for a temporary period.

Every employee will have a contract of employment - the terms of which may be in writing or implied. In this type of situation, the employee will be agreeing to a temporary, rather than a permanent, variation of their terms and conditions of employment.

However, if these temporary working arrangements extend over a long period of time without significant problems, then the business need for a replacement may be questioned. After doing such a good job of combining the duties of the two posts, the employer may consider permanently changing the employee’s role to combine duties from both of the existing and empty role.

Before making any decision, the employee should be consulted in relation to the proposed changes. There should be an opportunity to raise any issues they may have in a timely fashion. If Tony believes that taking on this amount of extra work permanently would have an adverse impact on his health, then this should be highlighted to the employer. All employers have a duty of care to their employees and should ensure that they operate a safe system of work.

Generally, to change the terms and conditions of employment, the employer will need the agreement of the employee. In consulting about the proposals, it may be possible to reach some compromise regarding the changes. It could, for instance, be possible for some of the duties in the currently empty role to be absorbed elsewhere in the business. If the workload was more manageable, Tony may be persuaded to agree to the extra duties – particularly if this also meant that he would get an associated pay rise.

However, if Tony doesn’t agree but the employer decides that there are good commercial reasons for the change in role, Tony might be dismissed and then at the same time offered re-engagement on the new terms. The employer takes the risk that Tony may refuse the offer. In these circumstances a claim could be brought for unfair dismissal. Whether it would succeed is not clear, because provided the employer has followed a fair procedure and acted reasonably, the dismissal may be found to be fair in these circumstances.

The other option that the employer has is to simply impose the change to the role. In that situation Tony may find that his only recourse is to resign and claim that he has been constructively dismissed due to the employer’s fundamental breach of contract. This is potentially a risky course of action - although he might be able to claim compensation, it would leave him without a job.

Katie Leaver, Sales director, LondonlovesJobs.com

It’s common that when people leave a business, others around them have to pick up the extra work until (and, indeed, if) a replacement arrives.

In this situation, Tony’s got a choice to make; he either wants to continue to take on the extra work but be rewarded for it, or he wants to go back to his old job without the extra pressure.

Employees frequently demonstrate their goodwill towards their organisation by operating outside of their strict job description or agreeing to areas of ‘job creep’, either temporarily or as part of a talent management trajectory with a view to being promoted.

Nuala O'Sullivan, Senior lecturer, Westminster Business School

If Tony decides he wants to go for the former, he needs to have a conversation with his boss and negotiate how his role can develop to take on the extra responsibility full time. The employer needn’t assume it’s just a pay rise Tony’s after; a change of job title – and therefore status – may be all it takes.

If Tony thinks it really is too much work for one person, he needs to talk to his boss before this impacts negatively on his other responsibilities. If he still wants the opportunity to do some of the other work and show what he can do, his boss may be prepared to look at his job description. They could add some of the new duties in, whilst taking some of his old responsibilities out if these can be shared with other willing team members who are also looking to develop.

If Tony would like to return to his old role but his boss is not in agreement as he’s now seen the work can be handled within the current team, his manager may need to discuss providing Tony with additional support which could come from elsewhere in the business.

However, Tony’s boss may find that Tony’s feelings about taking on the duties change if there is a financial reward for taking on the extra workload.

Tony’s boss also needs to be aware of the legalities of the current situation. Tony’s contract will stipulate the terms of his employment: if the extra work is outside of these terms, his company is in breach of contract for asking him to carry out the work without his agreement.

Of course, there are wider implications for the company in that Tony may be unable to meet the requirements of his own role whilst carrying out the extra work, so he could also be in breach of his own existing contract.

Longer term, there’s a danger that Tony’s boss may find himself looking for more than one new team member if Tony feels so stretched that he can’t deliver either job well.

Nuala O'Sullivan, Senior lecturer, Westminster Business School

Organisations have tended to operate recruitment freezes since the onset of the recession, marked by a reluctance to replace exiting staff. This has led to many ‘redundant’ posts being managed off the recruitment schedule. It has also opened opportunities for those interested in extending their expertise to act up, building their experience and enabling them to demonstrate skills.

Employees frequently demonstrate their goodwill towards their organisation by operating outside of their strict job description or agreeing to areas of ‘job creep’, either temporarily or as part of a talent management trajectory with a view to being promoted.

This goodwill has been investigated under the banner of Organisational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB) and a work-to-rule clearly illustrates how much employees offer back beyond their official contract. The darker side of OCB is when management may exploit goodwill by continuing to extend roles to the point of exhaustion, breaching their duty of care.

The employer could also be in breach of the Working Time Directive which advocates a work schedule of 48 hours a week and no more than 60 hours in one week. However, contracts are commonly constructed with a directive to respond to ‘reasonable requests’ from line managers.

Tony should make it clear that he does not view the current situation as a reasonable or viable long-term option and be clear that while he has been grateful for the opportunity to demonstrate his capability and ambition, without recognition of both roles he would be reluctant to continue.