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

[KFC]

TooMany2cvs said:

He is giving notice that he's leaving. Full stop. He intends to leave in three months time. New para.
He is aware that he only needs give one month's notice...

The rest is fluff. The intent is appreciated but not required. Here's a month's pay, we'll save you having to do any ironing.

I wouldn't be so confident you can just pick and choose which parts of emails you can accept.

"Hi xxx, I'm willing to accept the terms and start work on that job. But I need one further thing, since easter is coming up and xxx won't be in work I'm going to need a few days extra to complete it. I assume that will be okay."

Do you think it would be reasonable to say to that person no you've accepted the job, I'm not giving you 3 days more? Its pretty clear that both sentences are linked together. Its not realistic to pick and choose which sentences or phrases from a whole email that you're going to accept is it. I'm sure everyone here could go through their work emails and look at some sentences that don't mean what they meant when taken in context.

Do we need both a solicitor and someone with a degree in English to look over everything before we send it?

[Muzzer79]

TooMany2cvs said:

Muzzer79 said:

If not, then I don't see how the employer can bring forward the resignation date just because the OP has given more notice than is in the contract?

They haven't. The date of his resignation is the date of the email.

His actual leaving date is, contractually, one month after that date.
However, he's offered to work for three months - but they don't require him to.
In fact, they don't require him to work during the one month contractual notice period - but they do have to pay him in lieu.

OK, let's spin this around.

Say I'm being made redundant. I receive a letter from my company along the lines of this (obviously worded better):

Dear Muzzer79

We are making your position redundant.

It is our intention for your last day to be 30th June 2015.

We are required to give you 1 month's notice, but we are letting you know now so you can plan ahead.

You will be required to work up until your leaving date, so no PILON.

Regards
My Company

Using the logic applied to the OP, I could tell the company to poke it - they've made me redundant - work for a month, then walk out?

[9mm]

KFC said:

I wouldn't be so confident you can just pick and choose which parts of emails you can accept.

"Hi xxx, I'm willing to accept the terms and start work on that job. But I need one further thing, since easter is coming up and xxx won't be in work I'm going to need a few days extra to complete it. I assume that will be okay."

Do you think it would be reasonable to say to that person no you've accepted the job, I'm not giving you 3 days more? Its pretty clear that both sentences are linked together. Its not realistic to pick and choose which sentences or phrases from a whole email that you're going to accept is it. I'm sure everyone here could go through their work emails and look at some sentences that don't mean what they meant when taken in context.

Do we need both a solicitor and someone with a degree in English to look over everything before we send it?

The OP hasn't got a hope in hell of getting anywhere with an ET.

Let's see if I'm wrong but don't hold your breath.

[TypeRTom]

OP - what does your contract say about giving notice? Does it say to give notice to HR, to your boss or something else? Does it say how the notice must be given? Does it say how the company will give you notice?

I'd second the recommendation to get proper advice on this before writing it off as a lesson learnt and moving on.

[TooMany2cvs]

Muzzer79 said:

OK, let's spin this around.

Say I'm being made redundant.

Using the logic applied to the OP, I could tell the company to poke it - they've made me redundant - work for a month, then walk out?

Apart from the small detail that, legally, there'd have had to be a chunk more surrounding and preceding that letter? Yes, you could do exactly that. And they'd probably say "Thank you".

[PurpleMoonlight]

TooMany2cvs said:

Back to page 6 of this thread...

CraigJ said:

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

I’m aware that I would only need to give one month and not three but I thought I would let those concerned know now so it gives time to find and help train a replacement.

Please let me know if a written notice is required now or 1 month before I intend to leave.

Thank you.

Craig"

He is giving notice that he's leaving. Full stop. He intends to leave in three months time. New para.
He is aware that he only needs give one month's notice...

The rest is fluff. The intent is appreciated but not required. Here's a month's pay, we'll save you having to do any ironing.

I don't agree with that.

If you want to be pedantic, which you clearly are analysing each part of the email in isolation, the first sentence gives the employer a warning of intended resignation, the 'shall' being the operative word. The second sentence then gives the date of the resignation, 30th June.

Having said that though, it is blatantly obvious that the OP is giving three months notice instead of one, and I am confident any employment tribunal would agree. They will concern themselves with the employees intention rather than he employers interpretation of parts out of context to the whole.

[9mm]

PurpleMoonlight said:

TooMany2cvs said:

Back to page 6 of this thread...

CraigJ said:

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

I’m aware that I would only need to give one month and not three but I thought I would let those concerned know now so it gives time to find and help train a replacement.

Please let me know if a written notice is required now or 1 month before I intend to leave.

Thank you.

Craig"

He is giving notice that he's leaving. Full stop. He intends to leave in three months time. New para.
He is aware that he only needs give one month's notice...

The rest is fluff. The intent is appreciated but not required. Here's a month's pay, we'll save you having to do any ironing.

I don't agree with that.

If you want to be pedantic, which you clearly are analysing each part of the email in isolation, the first sentence gives the employer a warning of intended resignation, the 'shall' being the operative word. The second sentence then gives the date of the resignation, 30th June.

Having said that though, it is blatantly obvious that the OP is giving three months notice instead of one, and I am confident any employment tribunal would agree. They will concern themselves with the employees intention rather than he employers interpretation of parts out of context to the whole.

So what exactly would the basis of the employee's claim be at the ET?

[With these feet]

So the OP gives notice, 2 months earlier than required, the employees counter with garden leave and 1 months pay.

I cant see they have done anything wrong, as said already you have stated you will be in direct competition to them, why on earth should they employ a competitor for then next 3 months when they can replace and retrain someone instead?

Also are there any clauses that would allow them you do this in the contract / small print?
Not uncommon for people to be marched out to prevent them taking customer lists or confidential files on their way out.

Think the OP thought too much of his employers and the position he held in the company.

Good luck however in your self employment, any reason why you wanted to leave it the extra couple of months?

[PurpleMoonlight]

9mm said:

So what exactly would the basis of the employee's claim be at the ET?

I would say unfair dismissal, with the compensation claim of two months salary.

It might not be worth the hassle for two months though which is likely what the employer is gambling on.

[HarryW]

Muzzer79 said:

Hmm intriguing one.

The employee (OP) is telling the employer of his resignation and intended leaving date. He is simply giving more notice than is in the contract.

If the employer wishes to flip this on receipt of that and terminate the OP with one month's notice, then surely they need to either have grounds for

a) dismissal
b) redundancy of the position?

Neither of which have had proper procedures followed.

Does intended resignation count as gross misconduct? If not, then I don't see how the employer can bring forward the resignation date just because the OP has given more notice than is in the contract?

Unless his position is verifiably and contractually untenable?

This is where I'm at on this one.
However I do not know what line of business he is in and if that is normal practice in shysters and sons ste hole inc,. Type companies.
In my line of work most are on 1 if not 3 or 6 months notice periods. If one of my junior engineers on 1 months notice gave me the heads up he was leaving in 3 months I'd be pleased. I certainly wouldn't drop him immediately, unless there were extenuating circumstances such as he was a pain and better for all concerned if he went now, even then I would seek HR advice if said email constituted resignation or intent to resign in the near future for fear of unfair dismissal proceedings..

[PurpleMoonlight]

With these feet said:

I cant see they have done anything wrong, as said already you have stated you will be in direct competition to them, why on earth should they employ a competitor for then next 3 months when they can replace and retrain someone instead?

Because there are laws protecting employment.

[With these feet]

But surely there are also, perhaps clauses in the contract, allowing them to dismiss the way they did if they felt he would be in a position to benefit from continued employment?

So, if out of the blue the employers said "Heres a months notice and a months money, dont worry about coming in", which I understand would be within their rights, it would be deemed as unfair - even though they have given the correct amount of notice?

Perhaps they decided not to accept the intended resignation and simply give him the months notice?

[PurpleMoonlight]

With these feet said:

But surely there are also, perhaps clauses in the contract, allowing them to dismiss the way they did if they felt he would be in a position to benefit from continued employment?

So, if out of the blue the employers said "Heres a months notice and a months money, dont worry about coming in", which I understand would be within their rights, it would be deemed as unfair - even though they have given the correct amount of notice?

Perhaps they decided not to accept the intended resignation and simply give him the months notice?

What makes you think his employer can simply terminate his employment with a months notice?

[Jasandjules]

PurpleMoonlight said:

What makes you think his employer can simply terminate his employment with a months notice?

Unfortunately I think an ET will interpret his email quite simply as handed in his notice. It was thereafter accepted. However his employer did not accept his attempt to engage a three month notice period but reverted to the contractual notice period. The wording is against him in my view.

So his employment has not been terminated per se. He has resigned. He can withdraw his resignation and the company may accept, though I do doubt it.

[With these feet]

PurpleMoonlight said:

What makes you think his employer can simply terminate his employment with a months notice?

What makes you think they cant?

If indeed he is in a position to remove, read or copy files or customer lists, destroy or deface existing documents etc etc etc then maybe there is justification in what is basically instant dismissal?

Perhaps there is more to the reasoning behind it than we have been told, nor are we aware what the job entails.

[PurpleMoonlight]

With these feet said:

What makes you think they cant?

Oh a little thing called the Law.

Edited by PurpleMoonlight on Wednesday 1st April 19:56

[robinessex]

If you are going self employed, why not start your new business 3 months earlier ? Put your energy there, not waste it with legal arguments with your last employer.

[anonymous-user]

So if I have this right, you are/were on a 1 month notice period and gave the company 3 months notice in a resignation letter.

Their reaction was to pay up your notice period from the date of giving notice and effectively put you on garden leave. Lots of companies will march an employee out the door soon as the resignation letter goes in, lots of reasons for doing this.

I suspect you are surprised at the reaction as you thought you were being helpful and misjudged their reaction and are out 2 months ahead of schedule.

Best advice is start your company 2 months early.

[9mm]

With these feet said:

PurpleMoonlight said:

What makes you think his employer can simply terminate his employment with a months notice?

What makes you think they cant?

If indeed he is in a position to remove, read or copy files or customer lists, destroy or deface existing documents etc etc etc then maybe there is justification in what is basically instant dismissal?

Perhaps there is more to the reasoning behind it than we have been told, nor are we aware what the job entails.

That's not what they're doing.

He has resigned and offered three months' notice.
They have accepted his resignation but declined his offer and told him one is enough, in line with his contract.
Gardening leave or payment in lieu is not instant dismissal and most leavers welcome it.

The only argument to be had here is whether his letter constitutes a resignation.

He is quite free to take his chances at an ET but the employer is NOT saying "here's a month's notice, now bugger off".

I don't think he has a prayer.

[Jonsv8]

robinessex said:

If you are going self employed, why not start your new business 3 months earlier ? Put your energy there, not waste it with legal arguments with your last employer.

Because he's getting married in the middle of his proposed notice period which of course wouldn't be a distraction at all