My company allows sidesteps down to 300 feet (i.e. wings level, on centerline of the sidestepping runway latest 300 feet, and during the maneuver of course all other stabilized criteria met). So it is entirely possible to be become VMC at less than 1000 feet and break off to a parallel runway at e.g. 700 feet. If it can avoid a go-around due to someone not taking off fast enough at the original runway - why not give it a try, and if it doesn't work: TOGA.
However, in such case (no matter type), I would absolutely say to keep heads up and concentrate on flying the aircraft - both pilots. PM being just as active looking outside and monitoring flight instruments, for excessive deviations.
If the company have chosen to allow sidesteps at such low altitudes, and it triggers e.g. a "below G/S" warning for the original runway, I think whoever analyses the FODA data should be able to interpret the situation and discard it as being within limits of the SOP. And should they have questions, it shouldn't be difficult to explain the situation and why a go around was not performed, if everything was within limits.
What is written in you SOPs about the subject? And what about sending your safety department an email inquiring about the subject. I know there are some companies that uses FODA to punish. My company is fortunately sensible and a FODA is no big deal if there is a rational explanation. Most of the time they are even sensible enough to sort the irrelevant excursion out by themselves.
This is an example of FODA being contra productive to safety. I.e. causing you to take actions to avoid a FODA, distracting from on the task at hand.