Told my employer I was leaving, didn't end well!
Discussion
Thank you for all the replies.
Just to clear things up. It keeps being said that my email was me giving my notice. Two weeks ago a colleague with doing the same job with the same job title gave his notice by email. He was told this wasn't acceptable and was told it needed to be sent in writing and signed.
I will be in touch with an employment solicitor today who has come recommended and has agreed to take a look.
Just to help a few here my contract states that a week for each year I have been employed with a minimum of 1 month and a maximum of 3. I does not state that I can not give more than the one month.
Just to clear things up. It keeps being said that my email was me giving my notice. Two weeks ago a colleague with doing the same job with the same job title gave his notice by email. He was told this wasn't acceptable and was told it needed to be sent in writing and signed.
I will be in touch with an employment solicitor today who has come recommended and has agreed to take a look.
Just to help a few here my contract states that a week for each year I have been employed with a minimum of 1 month and a maximum of 3. I does not state that I can not give more than the one month.
CraigJ said:
Thank you for all the replies.
Just to clear things up. It keeps being said that my email was me giving my notice. Two weeks ago a colleague with doing the same job with the same job title gave his notice by email. He was told this wasn't acceptable and was told it needed to be sent in writing and signed.
I will be in touch with an employment solicitor today who has come recommended and has agreed to take a look.
Just to help a few here my contract states that a week for each year I have been employed with a minimum of 1 month and a maximum of 3. I does not state that I can not give more than the one month.
Was he also told to leave immediately with paid notice?Just to clear things up. It keeps being said that my email was me giving my notice. Two weeks ago a colleague with doing the same job with the same job title gave his notice by email. He was told this wasn't acceptable and was told it needed to be sent in writing and signed.
I will be in touch with an employment solicitor today who has come recommended and has agreed to take a look.
Just to help a few here my contract states that a week for each year I have been employed with a minimum of 1 month and a maximum of 3. I does not state that I can not give more than the one month.
Mermaid said:
TooMany2cvs said:
So lemme get this straight...
Your contract says one month's notice.
You've told them you're resigning.
They've told you to work one month's notice, no more, no less, as per your contract.
And you're feeling hard done-by and want another two months pay...?
NO he has been paid off - one month's salary in lieu - and told to shoo off forthwith to prevent any risk to them.Your contract says one month's notice.
You've told them you're resigning.
They've told you to work one month's notice, no more, no less, as per your contract.
And you're feeling hard done-by and want another two months pay...?
It suited him to leave at the end of three moths, and he thought the employer would be pleased that he gave more notice than required to. Well meaning, but a tad naive perhaps.
a member of my family did this once, said they would be leaving in six months and was letting them know now to let them find a new person. Guess what happened??
Jonsv8 said:
A quick google gave this
http://www.fairwork.gov.au/ending-employment/notic...
It's aussie (couldnt be arsed to keep looking for UK but feel free) and its for the employer to accept the longer notice period.
You can say it as many times as you want but that still doesn't make it right. Point to UK employee law and we might accept it.
Is the OP in Australia?? Not sure the relevance of above if not?http://www.fairwork.gov.au/ending-employment/notic...
It's aussie (couldnt be arsed to keep looking for UK but feel free) and its for the employer to accept the longer notice period.
You can say it as many times as you want but that still doesn't make it right. Point to UK employee law and we might accept it.
CraigJ said:
Thank you for all the replies.
Just to clear things up. It keeps being said that my email was me giving my notice. Two weeks ago a colleague with doing the same job with the same job title gave his notice by email. He was told this wasn't acceptable and was told it needed to be sent in writing and signed.
I will be in touch with an employment solicitor today who has come recommended and has agreed to take a look.
Just to help a few here my contract states that a week for each year I have been employed with a minimum of 1 month and a maximum of 3. I does not state that I can not give more than the one month.
Reading the above it sounds like the 1 months notice is correct as you have worked there just over 3 years? 1 week per year would be 3 weeks so the 1 month minimum kicks in. I'd personally focus my energies on the new business and getting married! Litigation is very time consuming and very often less fruitful than expected.Just to clear things up. It keeps being said that my email was me giving my notice. Two weeks ago a colleague with doing the same job with the same job title gave his notice by email. He was told this wasn't acceptable and was told it needed to be sent in writing and signed.
I will be in touch with an employment solicitor today who has come recommended and has agreed to take a look.
Just to help a few here my contract states that a week for each year I have been employed with a minimum of 1 month and a maximum of 3. I does not state that I can not give more than the one month.
Will be interesting to hear what the employment solicitor has to say, keep us posted and chin up!
Reading your email I think it would hinge on whether your email constitutes a resignation - I read it not as a resignation but as a query about resignation.
If, as you mention, one of your other colleagues was told they could not accept resignation by email then this also sets a precedent for them; there cannot be different rules for different people on the matter - either resignations must be in writing or not.
That said, the time, effort and cost involved in 'being right' (and possibly 'being wrong' in the opinion of a tribunal) is probably better focussed toward building your new business, albeit a little earlier than planned.
If, as you mention, one of your other colleagues was told they could not accept resignation by email then this also sets a precedent for them; there cannot be different rules for different people on the matter - either resignations must be in writing or not.
That said, the time, effort and cost involved in 'being right' (and possibly 'being wrong' in the opinion of a tribunal) is probably better focussed toward building your new business, albeit a little earlier than planned.
Just thinking a little more 'creatively' .... is it possible that the employer, knowing that the OP is getting married in May, has taken the email as a ruse by the OP to try get 3 months free leave so he can enjoy his wedding and honeymoon without any loss to his pay?
They may have thought the OP knows they will want him gone immediately due to working in a 'similar' area. They may have thought 'cheeky blighter giving 3 months notice thinking he'll get 3 moths gardening leave'.
Just a thought!
They may have thought the OP knows they will want him gone immediately due to working in a 'similar' area. They may have thought 'cheeky blighter giving 3 months notice thinking he'll get 3 moths gardening leave'.
Just a thought!
garyhun said:
Just thinking a little more 'creatively' .... is it possible that the employer, knowing that the OP is getting married in May, has taken the email as a ruse by the OP to try get 3 months free leave so he can enjoy his wedding and honeymoon without any loss to his pay?
They may have thought the OP knows they will want him gone immediately due to working in a 'similar' area. They may have thought 'cheeky blighter giving 3 months notice thinking he'll get 3 moths gardening leave'.
Just a thought!
I was wondering if the employer (or any other employees) will see how far they could stretch it. If you said 4 months till I go leave for a competitor would they just pay you the full whack? They may have thought the OP knows they will want him gone immediately due to working in a 'similar' area. They may have thought 'cheeky blighter giving 3 months notice thinking he'll get 3 moths gardening leave'.
Just a thought!
I'm not sure what I'd do as an employer if they said they're leaving at Christmas
If I was only risking a couple of months wages then fair enough just kick them out the door now and worry about it later... but if you're risking paying them for 9 months or something thats far from ideal.http://www.lra.org.uk/index/employment-questions-a...
"Where an employee gives a longer notice period than is required in the contract of employment, the employer can either accept the longer notice period or indicate that they do not wish the employee to give longer than the contractual period. In this instance the contract would come to an end when the normal contractual notice period has been served."
So this suggests it comes down to whether he officially handed in his notice. The employee handbook should state how to resign. His case might be strengthened by the case he quotes of a fellow co-worker. The employee handbook should state how to resign.
Either way, I know many on here disagree but the company have acted like arses. They could easily have spoken to him and discussed the implications of leaving.
"Where an employee gives a longer notice period than is required in the contract of employment, the employer can either accept the longer notice period or indicate that they do not wish the employee to give longer than the contractual period. In this instance the contract would come to an end when the normal contractual notice period has been served."
So this suggests it comes down to whether he officially handed in his notice. The employee handbook should state how to resign. His case might be strengthened by the case he quotes of a fellow co-worker. The employee handbook should state how to resign.
Either way, I know many on here disagree but the company have acted like arses. They could easily have spoken to him and discussed the implications of leaving.
mikeyr said:
His case might be strengthened by the case he quotes of a fellow co-worker.
Either way, I know many on here disagree but the company have acted like arses. They could easily have spoken to him and discussed the implications of leaving.
We don't know the, umm, intangibles surrounding him and his ex-colleague. For all we know, the employer were gutted to lose them but regard the OP as considerably more expendable...?Either way, I know many on here disagree but the company have acted like arses. They could easily have spoken to him and discussed the implications of leaving.
Without seeing the wording of the contract, who cab say what rights the parties do or don't have?
You could suppose, that the contract says the OP and the employer must give no less than 1 month's notice. 'No less' implies that either party can give more. The restriction is that it must be no less.
Bear in mind the employer, in the absence of gross misconduct or contractual justification, cannot arbitrarily fire the employee simply because he has expressed an intention to leave on a given date.
What employee behaviour or contractual right does the employer rely on to terminate the employee's contract here?
You could suppose, that the contract says the OP and the employer must give no less than 1 month's notice. 'No less' implies that either party can give more. The restriction is that it must be no less.
Bear in mind the employer, in the absence of gross misconduct or contractual justification, cannot arbitrarily fire the employee simply because he has expressed an intention to leave on a given date.
What employee behaviour or contractual right does the employer rely on to terminate the employee's contract here?
9mm said:
I'm been on the employer side dozens of times and the only time we fold is if we think we're going to lose - once that I can recall.
For the same company? It does depend on the company. A lot of companies are clueless how to handle a court summons and don't want to get involved. Last company I sued was Sony (not in the ET), against whom I got a default judgement, because their legal department is useless. You'd think they'd know better.9mm said:
If you're going to give the OP advice, I think it's only sensible to encourage him to investigate the average ET settlement (he may be surprised) and to take into account all of the implications of terminating his employment on bad terms - win or lose.
He can go to the county court instead of the ET. Two months wages seems to be what he's looking for.TooMany2cvs said:
We don't know the, umm, intangibles surrounding him and his ex-colleague. For all we know, the employer were gutted to lose them but regard the OP as considerably more expendable...?
Does it make a difference? Should one be made to resign by writing it in his own blood and the other by just thinking it (know that's a facetious example but you get my gist)? thelawnet said:
9mm said:
I'm been on the employer side dozens of times and the only time we fold is if we think we're going to lose - once that I can recall.
For the same company? It does depend on the company. A lot of companies are clueless how to handle a court summons and don't want to get involved. Last company I sued was Sony (not in the ET), against whom I got a default judgement, because their legal department is useless. You'd think they'd know better.9mm said:
If you're going to give the OP advice, I think it's only sensible to encourage him to investigate the average ET settlement (he may be surprised) and to take into account all of the implications of terminating his employment on bad terms - win or lose.
He can go to the county court instead of the ET. Two months wages seems to be what he's looking for.Doesn't matter if it's CC or ET, it will be remembered and won't do him any favours. I don't think he has a good case but even if he did, I don't think it's worth pursuing on the basis of cost:benefit.
OP 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
This doesn't read to me like a formal resignationI’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
This reads to me like an e-mail from the OP informing of his intention to resign.
Especially the last sentence, where he asks if written notice (i.e, his resignation; believing an e-mail not to be sufficient) is needed now or a month before he intends to go.
It could be argued either way, and the OP was perhaps naive in formalising this in writing, but I would certainly pursue on this basis.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff