Told my employer I was leaving, didn't end well!

[9mm]

charltjr said:

That's my opinion too, but I'm not an expert in employment law.

Neither am I but I've employed and fired plenty of people and I'd love to see an EL make a case for the OP fly. Better still, take it no win, no fee.

[TooMany2cvs]

9mm said:

Better still, take it no win, no fee.

They're lawyers, not philanthropists.

The OP said "Look, you might need three months to find a replacement, and I'm happy to work that." The employer said "Thanks, no need for that."

Edited by TooMany2cvs on Wednesday 1st April 10:50

[Sheepshanks]

Jonsv8 said:

The wording is important as stated by others and irrespective of your intent but one interpretation could be

- I'm resigning
- I want to work three months notice

Your employer effectively says
- we accept your resignation
- we are holding you to the 1 month contractual notice period
- we believe you being physically at work is not appropriate, we will pay you to stay away

I can't see any issue with that. I'm not sure why anyone would. You're the one who has tried to vary your employment contract.

I agree will all of that.

CraigJ said:

I am going into business for my self and I have told them.

When did you tell them that?

Despite what you've said about it not affecting your previous employer, in many jobs you'd be out on your ear as soon as the company were aware of that. They'd pay minimum notice only to avoid suggestions of unfair dismissal for gross misconduct.

[anonymous-user]

The way I read it he has given notice of his intention to resign on a specific date.

[Funk]

desolate said:

The way I read it he has given notice of his intention to resign on a specific date.

This makes it a little more complex I think. The OP has given notice that he intended to leave as of the 30th June and was very clear as to why he was giving them advance notice.

I can see why the company has done what it's done but I would think it's worth seeing whether any employment law specialists might think the employer has acted outside of its remit?

I guess it comes down to whether notice starts when the employee wants it to (ie. to take effect 30th May - 30th June) or whether it starts when the employee signals their intention to leave? I know the OP has thought he was doing his employer a favour and has ended up coming off worse as a result.

It comes back to one simple thing - look out for No.1 every time, make sure things happen the way you want them to.

[Rude-boy]

OP - Honest truth you have been very naïve about this. Just look at some of the posts from employers on this thread. You will see that there are an awful lot of people who are incapable of discerning the difference between a good and helpful employee who, even though they are about to leave the company, is trying to make sure that the split is as easy and amicable for all concerned, and a leach.

What a lot of these super directors seem to have missed is that if you were the sort who was about to rip as much from the old company as possible before leaving you don't tend to be the sort who gives 2 months more notice than they are legally required to do. It also gives you an insight into the morality of some employers.

Anyway what is done is done - this will likely have knocked your financial planning about a bit so I would concentrate on looking at that and on getting things running a bit earlier than planed.

FWIW I know a chap very well who was about to set up on their own. A careless comment from another friend (who knew what was going on but isn't very bright) to a girl they were chatting up in a club one night lead to his boss calling him in to a meeting mid Monday morning (I think that the girl was his Niece or something like that) and him being handed a box with his belongings an hour later. This was about 4 months before they were intending to start up and they were in deep st as they had planed on saving all of those last 3 wage packets to cover them over the start up of their new business.

Since then things have gone quite well and he no longer works in January.

[Jonsv8]

Rude-boy said:

OP - Honest truth you have been very naïve about this. Just look at some of the posts from employers on this thread. You will see that there are an awful lot of people who are incapable of discerning the difference between a good and helpful employee who, even though they are about to leave the company, is trying to make sure that the split is as easy and amicable for all concerned, and a leach.

What a lot of these super directors seem to have missed is that if you were the sort who was about to rip as much from the old company as possible before leaving you don't tend to be the sort who gives 2 months more notice than they are legally required to do. It also gives you an insight into the morality of some employers.

Anyway what is done is done - this will likely have knocked your financial planning about a bit so I would concentrate on looking at that and on getting things running a bit earlier than planed.

FWIW I know a chap very well who was about to set up on their own. A careless comment from another friend (who knew what was going on but isn't very bright) to a girl they were chatting up in a club one night lead to his boss calling him in to a meeting mid Monday morning (I think that the girl was his Niece or something like that) and him being handed a box with his belongings an hour later. This was about 4 months before they were intending to start up and they were in deep st as they had planed on saving all of those last 3 wage packets to cover them over the start up of their new business.

Since then things have gone quite well and he no longer works in January.

The big bad boss view...

An employee who resigns is showing no support for the business
Offering to help in the way the op has is to try and leave on good grounds to leave the door open for a return. A return will be judged on past performance not a convoluted exit
Employee motivation invariably falls off during notice period
During notice period employee will tell all other employees how fantastic life is going to be once left unsettling staff
No employee is bigger than the company (ask clarkson) and its a little patronising to think differently and that extended notice is required to replace them. The notice period is set accordingly as part of the contract. For avoidance of doubt I include myself in this.

"I am writing to give notice that I shall be leaving XXXXX. I intend to leave on the 30th of June 2015.

Would have been much better served by having a conversation to agree. If you've not got a relationship with management to do that then why have a sense of loyalty.

[anonymous-user]

So have I woken up in a parallel universe where an employer can just give an employee a month's notice and that's that?

I need to change my lawyer if that is the case.

[Corpulent Tosser]

I understand the OP being pissed off, I also understand why his employer took the action they did.

I have on a couple of occasions given more notice than required to allow the company time to recruit someone else, but I have done it after speaking with my immediate superior and letting them know my intention, it has always been well received, what I didn't do was go into print before having the conversation, however I am a contrator not employee so slightly different scenario.

One of the last jobs I had as an employee I did give my notice to my superior and was told to sit down while he phoned HR, I was then escorted to my workplace, cleared my personal effects and escorted from the premises and was then paid my notice period for staying home. Can't say I complained about it.

[berlintaxi]

desolate said:

So have I woken up in a parallel universe where an employer can just give an employee a month's notice and that's that?

No, the employee tended their resignation, the employer accepted their resignation in accordance with the terms of their contract of employment, jeez it ain't hard.

[anonymous-user]

berlintaxi said:

desolate said:

So have I woken up in a parallel universe where an employer can just give an employee a month's notice and that's that?

No, the employee tended their resignation, the employer accepted their resignation in accordance with the terms of their contract of employment, jeez it ain't hard.

I am quite prepared to be educated, but like I said he didn't resign, he gave notice of his intention to resign.

He is going self employed anyway so presumably can start earlier so his losses are moot. I still can't see how an employer can just terminate the contract on an arbitrary date.

Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 1st April 10:46

[berlintaxi]

desolate said:

berlintaxi said:

desolate said:

So have I woken up in a parallel universe where an employer can just give an employee a month's notice and that's that?

No, the employee tended their resignation, the employer accepted their resignation in accordance with the terms of their contract of employment, jeez it ain't hard.

I am quite prepared to be educated, but like I said he didn't resign, he gave notice of his intention to resign.

He is going self employed anyway so presumably can start earlier so his losses are moot. I still can't see how an employer can just terminate the contract on an arbitrary date.

Edited by desolate on Wednesday 1st April 10:46

"I am writing to give notice that I shall be leaving XXXXX."

Resignation, regardless of what date you put on it.

[anonymous-user]

berlintaxi said:

"I am writing to give notice that I shall be leaving XXXXX."

Resignation, regardless of what date you put on it.

Resignation as of date XXXXX.

Not XXXXX - 2 months.

I have been employing people for more than 20 years, and that's the way I would read it.

[jesta1865]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

i wonder how much him getting married in may and perhaps having a honeymoon booked that they would pay him to go on has made them decide to send him home for a month paid?

[berlintaxi]

desolate said:

berlintaxi said:

"I am writing to give notice that I shall be leaving XXXXX."

Resignation, regardless of what date you put on it.

Resignation as of date XXXXX.

Not XXXXX - 2 months.

I have been employing people for more than 20 years, and that's the way I would read it.

You must be a fairly soft boss then. They have said "you want to leave fine, your contract states 1 months notice and that's all we require", naive at best to believe you can tell a company you want to leave at x date and expect to hold them to it.

[anonymous-user]

berlintaxi said:

You must be a fairly soft boss then. They have said "you want to leave fine, your contract states 1 months notice and that's all we require", naive at best to believe you can tell a company you want to leave at x date and expect to hold them to it.

I think I must be, yes.

I believe as an employee you can give more than the required minimum notice. If I was the OP I would probably withdraw my notice and see what they did to that.

I any event he hasn't really got any material losses, but if the employer's actions have invalidated any post employment restrictions then it's fair game.

Being a letter of the law merchant cuts both ways.

[berlintaxi]

An employee can give as much notice as they like, it doesn't mean the company have to agree to it, they only need to abide by the terms of the contract of employment, which on the information given by the OP it would appear they have done.

[Vaud]

desolate said:

I think I must be, yes.

I believe as an employee you can give more than the required minimum notice. If I was the OP I would probably withdraw my notice and see what they did to that.

I any event he hasn't really got any material losses, but if the employer's actions have invalidated any post employment restrictions then it's fair game.

Being a letter of the law merchant cuts both ways.

Our company welcomes additional notice. Even those on three or six months notice - supposedly reflecting the ability to replace - we would be hard pushed to find candidates, complete selection and get an offer out, accepted, and then get them on board, let alone any transition.

[Jasandjules]

Hmm, you appear to have given notice. The intent is clear from your email, regardless of your subsequent request to extend that for three months.

You may seek to withdraw your notice, but they do not have to accept from what I can see based upon your notice email.

[Durzel]

Vaud said:

Our company welcomes additional notice. Even those on three or six months notice - supposedly reflecting the ability to replace - we would be hard pushed to find candidates, complete selection and get an offer out, accepted, and then get them on board, let alone any transition.

Given the circumstances presented the employer doesn't have much of a choice but to put them on gardening leave. The OP has admitted to them that he's going self-employed, and will compete in the same field. It doesn't really matter as to the extent or scope of this competition, as there is no way of the company having surety of any assurances given. Having him remain in the office is a huge and unnecessary risk to them. The absolute best case scenario for them is that the OP continues to work at full capacity, but more realistically is likely to be going through the motions for the remaining time, or worse feathering his own nest.

I don't think it's necessarily even a trust issue, it's good prudence. There is no gain for the employer from keeping the OP on for his desired time, and especially not with continued access to sensitive data. The OP was very naive to think that the employer would disregard the fundamental employment contract and risks because of how much perceived goodwill, trustworthiness or whatever existed.