Told my employer I was leaving, didn't end well!
Discussion
Jonsv8 said:
He's giving notice. The full stop between the XXXX and the 'I intend to leave..' is in my opinion what hung him on this as he's offering to vary the notice. The contract does not say any notice period needs to be mutually agreed, only any variation to it. The op didn't say his resignation was conditional on them accepting this end date either.
.
It says the notice period is one month, but that this can be varied by mutual consent. .
The op is not offering one month's notice, he is offering three months notice. This is not a valid notice period according to the contract, so the OP has not given valid notice. He has not resigned.
I don't see how this is in doubt. If you are a landlord, and you don't give valid notice in terms of dates to quit, then you have offered no notice at all. Here, the OP has not offered valid, one month notice, he has clearly offered three months, which is only valid by mutual consent, You don't get the chop off half the letter in order to distort the clear offer of three months notice.
Resignation is an employee's choice. The employer does not get to dictate what the employee intended.
hondansx said:
I always thought in the first two years you can get dismissed for essentially any reason.
Legally, yes - you can't pursue an unfair dismissal claim if you've been employed for less than two continuous years, unless it's down to discrimination on the usual "protected characteristics" grounds (race/religion/gender/sexuality/etc).But the OP's worked there for three years...
thelawnet said:
It says the notice period is one month, but that this can be varied by mutual consent.
The op is not offering one month's notice, he is offering three months notice. This is not a valid notice period according to the contract, so the OP has not given valid notice. He has not resigned.
I don't see how this is in doubt. If you are a landlord, and you don't give valid notice in terms of dates to quit, then you have offered no notice at all. Here, the OP has not offered valid, one month notice, he has clearly offered three months, which is only valid by mutual consent, You don't get the chop off half the letter in order to distort the clear offer of three months notice.
Resignation is an employee's choice. The employer does not get to dictate what the employee intended.
Does the contract state he can offer more notice? It only states minimum, which is the amount required for them to find a replacement. He has made it clear he is off, why potentially carry someone for 3 months? The company is simply using their side of the contract to terminate, the OP doesnt have the option to give and work 3 months. Nothing to say the management hadn't heard he was starting up and thought "cheeky sod, string it out till it suits him, let him go now"..The op is not offering one month's notice, he is offering three months notice. This is not a valid notice period according to the contract, so the OP has not given valid notice. He has not resigned.
I don't see how this is in doubt. If you are a landlord, and you don't give valid notice in terms of dates to quit, then you have offered no notice at all. Here, the OP has not offered valid, one month notice, he has clearly offered three months, which is only valid by mutual consent, You don't get the chop off half the letter in order to distort the clear offer of three months notice.
Resignation is an employee's choice. The employer does not get to dictate what the employee intended.
"Dear Boss,
I'm sad to tell you I'm planning to leave. In 12 months time I am 65 and intend to retire on 03/04/16.
I appreciate it may take some time to replace me after so many years so I thought you would appreciate some extra notice beyond the 3 months I'm obliged to give by my contract.
Kind Regards,
AtC"
"Dear AtC,
Thank you for your email. I accept your resignation and confirm you are leaving on 03/07/15 as per the three month notice required by your contract. We are not firing you.
Yours sincerely,
Boss"
Assuming the same contract as the OP, is the employer in the clear here?
I'm sad to tell you I'm planning to leave. In 12 months time I am 65 and intend to retire on 03/04/16.
I appreciate it may take some time to replace me after so many years so I thought you would appreciate some extra notice beyond the 3 months I'm obliged to give by my contract.
Kind Regards,
AtC"
"Dear AtC,
Thank you for your email. I accept your resignation and confirm you are leaving on 03/07/15 as per the three month notice required by your contract. We are not firing you.
Yours sincerely,
Boss"
Assuming the same contract as the OP, is the employer in the clear here?
The employer done nothing wrong imo. The contract is 1 months notice. They have given him the 1 month pay, and was kind enough to not make him work that month. This fulfils the contract as both have mutualy consented to leaving. They will also not want someone who is going self employed who most likely will take some of their business away, working for another 3 months getting more "friendly" with clients.
People who say he should be paid 3 months are wrong. So in your eyes, if i tell my employer that im leaving in 40 years (when i finally retire) hopefully they will put me on gardening leave as i gave them 40 years notice... yes please. 40 years too early retirement here i come!!!
People who say he should be paid 3 months are wrong. So in your eyes, if i tell my employer that im leaving in 40 years (when i finally retire) hopefully they will put me on gardening leave as i gave them 40 years notice... yes please. 40 years too early retirement here i come!!!
hotchy said:
The employer done nothing wrong imo. The contract is 1 months notice. They have given him the 1 month pay, and was kind enough to not make him work that month. This fulfils the contract as both have mutualy consented to leaving. They will also not want someone who is going self employed who most likely will take some of their business away, working for another 3 months getting more "friendly" with clients.
People who say he should be paid 3 months are wrong. So in your eyes, if i tell my employer that im leaving in 40 years (when i finally retire) hopefully they will put me on gardening leave as i gave them 40 years notice... yes please. 40 years too early retirement here i come!!!
If you inform them of your intention to retire 12 months in advance would they be able to say "thanks, here's a month's money. Been nice knowing you?"People who say he should be paid 3 months are wrong. So in your eyes, if i tell my employer that im leaving in 40 years (when i finally retire) hopefully they will put me on gardening leave as i gave them 40 years notice... yes please. 40 years too early retirement here i come!!!
allergictocheese said:
"Dear Boss,
I'm sad to tell you I'm planning to leave. In 12 months time I am 65 and intend to retire on 03/04/16.
I appreciate it may take some time to replace me after so many years so I thought you would appreciate some extra notice beyond the 3 months I'm obliged to give by my contract.
Kind Regards,
AtC"
"Dear AtC,
Thank you for your email. I accept your resignation and confirm you are leaving on 03/07/15 as per the three month notice required by your contract. We are not firing you.
Yours sincerely,
Boss"
Assuming the same contract as the OP, is the employer in the clear here?
"I am writing to give notice that I shall be leaving XXXXX. I intend to leave on the 30th of June 2015."I'm sad to tell you I'm planning to leave. In 12 months time I am 65 and intend to retire on 03/04/16.
I appreciate it may take some time to replace me after so many years so I thought you would appreciate some extra notice beyond the 3 months I'm obliged to give by my contract.
Kind Regards,
AtC"
"Dear AtC,
Thank you for your email. I accept your resignation and confirm you are leaving on 03/07/15 as per the three month notice required by your contract. We are not firing you.
Yours sincerely,
Boss"
Assuming the same contract as the OP, is the employer in the clear here?
is not the same due the words "writing to give notice" as
"I am planning to leave."
You can't just make up different sentences with completely different words and with different sentiment as proof he hadn't resigned.
Put this another way, was this an offer of resignation in any way? If the employer had come back and said "fine, work until then" could the OP have withdrawn this later on? If he couldn't, then he had resigned. If he had resigned the one month clock started. If he could, then this is not a resignation and the employer wasn't able to accept it. It can't be both. Nowhere does he say his offer is conditional on them accepting a three months notice.
The OP has been back and posted after he was due to see legal advice and hasn't said what they said. I kinda feel he would have said if he'd been told something that supports his case.
Its going nowhere as half the people on here can't separate the intent and the legal and regretably for the OP, that matters.
Would an employment tribunal or a judge let an employer selectively quote from an email, take it out of context and apply that part only?
It really is quite clear what the employee means when you look at the whole email, rather than deliberately ignore parts of it.
Either way, if the OP is going into business on his own this may have been a cheap lesson at £4k if he ends up losing.
It really is quite clear what the employee means when you look at the whole email, rather than deliberately ignore parts of it.
Either way, if the OP is going into business on his own this may have been a cheap lesson at £4k if he ends up losing.
hotchy said:
The employer done nothing wrong imo. The contract is 1 months notice. They have given him the 1 month pay, and was kind enough to not make him work that month. This fulfils the contract as both have mutualy consented to leaving. They will also not want someone who is going self employed who most likely will take some of their business away, working for another 3 months getting more "friendly" with clients.
People who say he should be paid 3 months are wrong. So in your eyes, if i tell my employer that im leaving in 40 years (when i finally retire) hopefully they will put me on gardening leave as i gave them 40 years notice... yes please. 40 years too early retirement here i come!!!
He's not asking for 3 months pay for nothing. You've missed the point.People who say he should be paid 3 months are wrong. So in your eyes, if i tell my employer that im leaving in 40 years (when i finally retire) hopefully they will put me on gardening leave as i gave them 40 years notice... yes please. 40 years too early retirement here i come!!!
andy_s said:
He's not asking for 3 months pay for nothing. You've missed the point.
Effectively he's asking for it for nothing. Or for his decent wage while he re-organises the stationary store or pulls all the weeds from outside. He must know he wasn't going to be left in his current job.KFC said:
Effectively he's asking for it for nothing. Or for his decent wage while he re-organises the stationary store or pulls all the weeds from outside. He must know he wasn't going to be left in his current job.
'Effectively' is only the employers actions; he's not asking for it. He's trying to do them a favour. As for the OP knowing he wasn't going to be left in his current job, I refer you to the thread title...
hotchy said:
The employer done nothing wrong imo. The contract is 1 months notice. They have given him the 1 month pay, and was kind enough to not make him work that month. This fulfils the contract as both have mutualy consented to leaving. They will also not want someone who is going self employed who most likely will take some of their business away, working for another 3 months getting more "friendly" with clients.
People who say he should be paid 3 months are wrong. So in your eyes, if i tell my employer that im leaving in 40 years (when i finally retire) hopefully they will put me on gardening leave as i gave them 40 years notice... yes please. 40 years too early retirement here i come!!!
He has been employed there for over 2 years, his employer cannot just terminate the contract without just cause or without going through a 'written warning/chance to improve' process, this is UK employment law, it's not optional. Giving your employer advance warning that you intend to hand in your notice in 2 months time is neither cause for summary dismissal (i.e. It is not gross misconduct, etc.) nor it is it formally handing in your notice. The employer appears to have terminated his contract without cause, leaving themselves open to unfair dismissal. They could claim to be making his position redundant, with associated consultation, etc, but that is not the process they appear to have taken and in any case it could still be open to an unfair dismissal claim.People who say he should be paid 3 months are wrong. So in your eyes, if i tell my employer that im leaving in 40 years (when i finally retire) hopefully they will put me on gardening leave as i gave them 40 years notice... yes please. 40 years too early retirement here i come!!!
KFC said:
Would an employment tribunal or a judge let an employer selectively quote from an email, take it out of context and apply that part only?
It really is quite clear what the employee means when you look at the whole email, rather than deliberately ignore parts of it.
It really is quite clear what the employee means when you look at the whole email, rather than deliberately ignore parts of it.
Employer is clearly in the wrong, and acting out of spite.
hondansx said:
He's even said he works for a multi billion turnover company. Do you think they get employment law advice from Google?
My experience is yes they do, and they continue to keep digging until they suddenly realise the problem they have. They then can't get a compromise agreement in place quickly enough.To assume big companies don't make mistakes in this area would be wrong in my experience, even with legal advice.
I had a situation many years ago where the employer was acting under direct instruction from their solicitor, everything they did was subsequently torn to pieces by a very good employment barrister.
hotchy said:
People who say he should be paid 3 months are wrong. So in your eyes, if i tell my employer that im leaving in 40 years (when i finally retire) hopefully they will put me on gardening leave as i gave them 40 years notice... yes please. 40 years too early retirement here i come!!!
Not sure I see the relevance of this analogy. If your employer doesn't want to put you on gardening leave for the next 40 years, they can tell you to keep coming into work until you retire instead. It would, however, be manifestly unreasonable for them to dismiss you just because you don't intend to work for them until you die.Every employee (apart from the ones who die at their desks perhaps) is going to leave sooner or later. That doesn't by itself give their employer the right to dismiss them any time they like.
GT119 said:
He has been employed there for over 2 years, his employer cannot just terminate the contract without just cause or without going through a 'written warning/chance to improve' process, this is UK employment law, it's not optional. Giving your employer advance warning that you intend to hand in your notice in 2 months time is neither cause for summary dismissal (i.e. It is not gross misconduct, etc.) nor it is it formally handing in your notice. The employer appears to have terminated his contract without cause, leaving themselves open to unfair dismissal. They could claim to be making his position redundant, with associated consultation, etc, but that is not the process they appear to have taken and in any case it could still be open to an unfair dismissal claim.
The email from the employer reads as if they believe his email was notification of resignation so they believe they've not dismissed him but have only refused to consent to his request for a longer notification period. As per the scan of the contract the employer and employee both have to mutually consent to any modification of terms around notice.Any ET case will I suspect hinge on if the OP's email was notification of resignation or not. I'd be more concerned about restrict covenants TBH rather than two months pay.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff