I'm being asked to apply for my own role

I'm confused. I know that as part of redundancy it is law (correct me if I'm wrong) that my employer has to (1) Identify the pool of people from which my role is becoming redundant then (2) Tell me what the selection criteria is so that I can see if and why I am included in the unlucky group of people going.

I work as a Project Manager for a very large company in their IT department. They are currently outsourcing much of the work to an Indian firm but have already stated that roles will survive in-house. This included my role of Project Manager. However - they have also stated that the roles will be opened up for application and that people must apply for one of them if they wish to be considered for one. This means that the people lucky enough to stay will be selected by an interview process. (i.e. everyone is redundant but you can apply for one of the possitions which are being kept)

My question is...... If I am protected by law to ensure that my company applies a selection criteria when selecting who, from my role pool, is to be made redundant then how can this be seemingly bypassed by my company? I don't understand? Have I misunderstood the law?

Thanks in advance for any advice.

An interview process is a perfectly valid selection method for remaining jobs after a redundancy process, and essentially means the criteria being used are very closely related to the job, which makes business sense. it also means employees get the opportunity to demonstrate why you should be kept and why you would be best for the job.

What is your concern about this? Do you feel you will lose out through an interview/application process but would not if people were just chosen with selection criteria such as appraisal ratings, skills, experience, absence record, disciplinary record etc? A lot of those assess the same things anyway, obviously.

Thanks for that face2facehr.

My concern? I guess I was just confused. I knew about the rules re employers having to show their selection criteria so that everyone can see why (if) they are being chosen for redundancy. To me the interview method of selection gives employers an opportunity to abuse the process.

Example: My employer could keep on all the bright young things who earn a great deal less than I do. I’ve been with the company many years and if a selection criteria process was used I’d be very likely to keep my job. My fear is that my employer is unlikely to keep me on using an interview process when they can keep instead a much junior member of staff who admittedly wont do as good a job but will be on a lot less money than me.

Well if someone who isn't as good at the job, or as skilled or experienced as you gets selected you can appeal it just as you would if interviews are not involved. Interviews should be about finding the best person for the job, just as they would be for a normal recruitment process. So if you think it's clear you are better than someone else, you should appeal it.