Bonus Entitlement - am I stuffed?
Discussion
Jobbo said:
The resignation is the date of your notice, not the date of your employment ending.
Surely the date of resignation is the date you resign your post (actually leave) and when you hand in your resignation letter you are giving notice of your intent to resign your post ergo you will still be 'in post' and the resignation will not have taken place when the paymnet is made/due.Silverbullet767 said:
Guess what....
Today they have issued a 'detailed eligibility criteria'
It's written in broken English, and I can't make out what it's trying to say.
It reads.
Q. Am I eligible for (bonusname)?
A. If you fulfil the following criteria you are eligible for the discretionary payment:
a) You are a permanent or fixed term employee of (Company Name)
b) You have satisfactorily completed your probationary period before 2nd September 2011 or have completed more than 183 days as a fixed term employee.
c) You have not resigned at the time of payment and are working your notice period, unless this resignation is for retirement purposes.
This is really confusing, as it says to me, I am eligible if c) I have not resigned at the time of payment (payment is due before my last working day)
"In addition to my prior notice of resignation, I would like to inform the company that the reason for this resignation is: Early Retirement."Today they have issued a 'detailed eligibility criteria'
It's written in broken English, and I can't make out what it's trying to say.
It reads.
Q. Am I eligible for (bonusname)?
A. If you fulfil the following criteria you are eligible for the discretionary payment:
a) You are a permanent or fixed term employee of (Company Name)
b) You have satisfactorily completed your probationary period before 2nd September 2011 or have completed more than 183 days as a fixed term employee.
c) You have not resigned at the time of payment and are working your notice period, unless this resignation is for retirement purposes.
This is really confusing, as it says to me, I am eligible if c) I have not resigned at the time of payment (payment is due before my last working day)
- I'm not a lawyer.
Under the second (revised?) details, I'd say they screwed you, (maybe because you brought it up with HR.)
Now, 2.75x monthly salary has got to be worth having, regardless of your job, BUT getting lawyers officially involved will cost you and them money, and mean you leave under a dark cloud.
I would consider the implications of effectively burning your bridges, and what knock on effects this could have in the longer term. We can't make the decision for you, but please consider all the angles before you do so yourself.
Good luck.
Tyre Tread said:
Jobbo said:
The resignation is the date of your notice, not the date of your employment ending.
Surely the date of resignation is the date you resign your post (actually leave) and when you hand in your resignation letter you are giving notice of your intent to resign your post ergo you will still be 'in post' and the resignation will not have taken place when the paymnet is made/due.Oohh interesting:
Link said:
Most recently in the case is Farrell Matthews and Weir v Hansen. After
communicating the rate of a bonus, the employer wrote to the
employee adding a condition to the payment terms of the bonus. This
new condition was that if notice was given by either party the bonus
would cease to be payable. The employee complained about this
condition and subsequently resigned and was successful in her claim of
constructive unfair dismissal. The employee was awarded the bonus on
the basis that once she had been told that she would be paid the bonus,
it became a contractual entitlement and that adding a condition
amounted to a fundamental breach of contract.
http://www.employease.co.uk/uploadedfiles/Do%20you...communicating the rate of a bonus, the employer wrote to the
employee adding a condition to the payment terms of the bonus. This
new condition was that if notice was given by either party the bonus
would cease to be payable. The employee complained about this
condition and subsequently resigned and was successful in her claim of
constructive unfair dismissal. The employee was awarded the bonus on
the basis that once she had been told that she would be paid the bonus,
it became a contractual entitlement and that adding a condition
amounted to a fundamental breach of contract.
Stevenj214 said:
Oohh interesting:
Hopefully useful - but distinguishable because in that case the employee appears to have given notice after the bonus was announced, and in the OP's case it seems to have been before the announcement.Link said:
Most recently in the case is Farrell Matthews and Weir v Hansen. After
communicating the rate of a bonus, the employer wrote to the
employee adding a condition to the payment terms of the bonus. This
new condition was that if notice was given by either party the bonus
would cease to be payable. The employee complained about this
condition and subsequently resigned and was successful in her claim of
constructive unfair dismissal. The employee was awarded the bonus on
the basis that once she had been told that she would be paid the bonus,
it became a contractual entitlement and that adding a condition
amounted to a fundamental breach of contract.
http://www.employease.co.uk/uploadedfiles/Do%20you...communicating the rate of a bonus, the employer wrote to the
employee adding a condition to the payment terms of the bonus. This
new condition was that if notice was given by either party the bonus
would cease to be payable. The employee complained about this
condition and subsequently resigned and was successful in her claim of
constructive unfair dismissal. The employee was awarded the bonus on
the basis that once she had been told that she would be paid the bonus,
it became a contractual entitlement and that adding a condition
amounted to a fundamental breach of contract.
Still worth fighting, IMO.
Some good words of advice there louie.
But if you have been working where I have for a the past few years, you wouldn't mind burning a few bridges, HR in our division have had around 10+ grievances lodged against them in the last year alone, 1 of which was mine, it was even ignored by the HR director in head office. I wont go into details, but I got an official warning for my personal property being located on public land.
They are also currently screwing several employees regarding wages as I type this, the last of which was yesterday.
Thanks again, but I'm going to see this one through.
But if you have been working where I have for a the past few years, you wouldn't mind burning a few bridges, HR in our division have had around 10+ grievances lodged against them in the last year alone, 1 of which was mine, it was even ignored by the HR director in head office. I wont go into details, but I got an official warning for my personal property being located on public land.
They are also currently screwing several employees regarding wages as I type this, the last of which was yesterday.
Thanks again, but I'm going to see this one through.
louiebaby said:
* I'm not a lawyer.
Under the details in the first post, I would say you were eligible.
Under the second (revised?) details, I'd say they screwed you, (maybe because you brought it up with HR.)
Now, 2.75x monthly salary has got to be worth having, regardless of your job, BUT getting lawyers officially involved will cost you and them money, and mean you leave under a dark cloud.
I would consider the implications of effectively burning your bridges, and what knock on effects this could have in the longer term. We can't make the decision for you, but please consider all the angles before you do so yourself.
Good luck.
They cannot move the goalposts. Get it in writing that you are/are not going to get the cash.Under the details in the first post, I would say you were eligible.
Under the second (revised?) details, I'd say they screwed you, (maybe because you brought it up with HR.)
Now, 2.75x monthly salary has got to be worth having, regardless of your job, BUT getting lawyers officially involved will cost you and them money, and mean you leave under a dark cloud.
I would consider the implications of effectively burning your bridges, and what knock on effects this could have in the longer term. We can't make the decision for you, but please consider all the angles before you do so yourself.
Good luck.
Then make your move.
If not I would definately make a big fuss including noting that you will get lawyers in if the decision is not to your satisfaction. They would have budgeted to pay you - let's not forget that.
Note if they ARE moving the goalposts and insist you cannot get the money by using the rules in the 2nd notification then they are basically agreeing with you that you are still contractually bound to accept company decisions....go back to 1 you are still contractually employed and should get the cash.
(I didn't expect them to be)Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff