Four people, trained up from NMW to full time, reasonably paid, secure roles that also make them far more marketable outside if they choose to leave. Could have rejected and stuck with people who already had experience but pushed strongly for them to have the opportunity. As it was an insane workload pre-lockdowns, massive amounts of tasks have been removed and they don't get treated like shit/told they're crap or any of the shitty things that used to happen.
I identified and was asked to plan, design and implement a new process in an existing system that should reduce a particular task down from 300+ hours a year each just in passing things along for somebody else to deal with for another 500+ hours to a 5-15s look and click, everything completed, no more than 2.5 hours' work for them in a year. It also recognises them as the people best placed to make the decision yes or no, with no negative consequences for either decision; if it's no and has to be referred on in 1/100 times, thank you, that's the right thing, you're trusted to make that call as you have the on the ground knowledge nobody else has. It's also using an existing system with inbuilt and carefully thought out security. They were aware that it was being looked into because the previous system had collapsed due to
a bone idle manager differences of opinion about whether the work to plan and implement it was an effective use of time.
It could also have been the thousands of hours of work alternative that the previous
lazy bastard person had tried to make them do and had started off a massive row in the background because dropping these people in the shit was simply not going to be allowed to happen. Yes, I stamped my feet and said it simply wasn't going to happen, which the big bosses agreed was absolutely the right position to take.
I paid careful attention to how they'd be informed it was happening so that they didn't feel ordered around and it was explained (albeit not in quite so much detail) that it is only being done because the research and tests had established it was likely to be far less work for them (and if something went wrong, it could easily be withdrawn, improved or abandoned).
I personally think that preventing a resignation-level event and then creating an alternative that takes less than 1% of their time AND acknowledges their worth/knowledge is something that should be met with an 'Oh, Okay, that sounds like it might be easier?'. Wouldn't have had a problem with 'Q. Is this going to take us more time? A. No' I wasn't expecting 'OMG, that's amazing, thank you so much for spending hours trying to reduce our workload and once the procedure happens, our day to day so much easier', although it would have been nice. I even did a soft rollout so they wouldn't get lumbered with the entire two hours' work at once, so they're looking at about 3-5 minutes a week. Less time than it takes to answer the phone and type a single email.
Let's just say the response was not as neutral as I had hoped. They interpreted 'you have control and it's quicker for you than you having to pass it to somebody else' as 'you're going to be doing more work'. And needed the precise mathematics explained to them before they stopped bristling with righteous indignation.
---
@Redrose97 I've reported your post and asked if the bit that I think could potentially identify him and you is deleted (the BBC stuff).
You don't sound to be doing anything wrong - it sounds as though he's trying to bully you and your colleagues and manager are aware of this. If you can, email your manager each time there's a concern and mention if you feel he's picking on you because of your Autism. It might be helpful if you need to submit a grievance and is another record of your disability/protected characteristic.