u/Odd_Mirror5920

I’m in a bit of a weird spot with a redundancy process here in Ireland and I’m wondering if I’m losing my mind or if this is as dodgy as it feels.

I’ve been with my company for 18 months. Recently, they started a project scale down and used a "scoring matrix" based on quality and errors to pick who stays. Here’s the kicker: I’m the top producer on the team and have the 2nd highest quality score, with only a 1.1% error rate.

The company is letting me go, but they’re keeping new starters who have been here for only 2 months and have a "100% quality record." The reason their quality is 100%? They haven't actually processed any work yet.

The HR lead basically admitted to me that they only looked at the total number of mistakes, not the volume of work. So, because I did 1,000+ tickets and naturally had a few tiny errors, I’m being sacked. Meanwhile, people who have done zero work are being kept because their stats look "perfect" on paper.

It honestly feels like a massive logic gap or worse, a deliberate trick to get rid of senior staff and keep the cheaper new hires. To make it weirder, I work completely independently, while most of the people staying are still trainees who need their work approved by someone like me.

During our call, HR even admitted they hadn't actually verified the raw data and just took a summary from the managers at face value. They’ve offered me an extra 4 weeks' pay if I sign a waiver and agree not to sue, but I’ve told them no. It feels like a bit of an insult when the whole process is so blatantly biased.

Has anyone here dealt with the WRC for "unfair selection"? Does the "Impersonality Test" for redundancy actually mean anything if they can just use skewed numbers like this? I’m definitely filing a Subject Access Request (SAR) to see the internal emails about how they scored me, but is it worth fighting this further?

Would love to hear if anyone has seen this kind of stuff in the tech/outsourcing sector here. Do companies usually get away with this kind of math?

Cheers.

I’m in a bit of a weird spot with a redundancy process here in Ireland and I’m wondering if I’m losing my mind or if this is as dodgy as it feels.

I’ve been with my company for 18 months. Recently, they started a project scale down and used a "scoring matrix" based on quality and errors to pick who stays. Here’s the kicker: I’m the top producer on the team and have the 2nd highest quality score, with only a 1.1% error rate.

The company is letting me go, but they’re keeping new starters who have been here for only 2 months and have a "100% quality record." The reason their quality is 100%? They haven't actually processed any work yet.

The HR lead basically admitted to me that they only looked at the total number of mistakes, not the volume of work. So, because I did 1,000+ tickets and naturally had a few tiny errors, I’m being sacked. Meanwhile, people who have done zero work are being kept because their stats look "perfect" on paper.

It honestly feels like a massive logic gap or worse, a deliberate trick to get rid of senior staff and keep the cheaper new hires. To make it weirder, I work completely independently, while most of the people staying are still trainees who need their work approved by someone like me.

During our call, HR even admitted they hadn't actually verified the raw data and just took a summary from the managers at face value. They’ve offered me an extra 4 weeks' pay if I sign a waiver and agree not to sue, but I’ve told them no. It feels like a bit of an insult when the whole process is so blatantly biased.

Has anyone here dealt with the WRC for "unfair selection"? Does the "Impersonality Test" for redundancy actually mean anything if they can just use skewed numbers like this? I’m definitely filing a Subject Access Request (SAR) to see the internal emails about how they scored me, but is it worth fighting this further?

Would love to hear if anyone has seen this kind of stuff in the tech/outsourcing sector here. Do companies usually get away with this kind of math?

Cheers.