Told my employer I was leaving, didn't end well!
Discussion
Ok,I guess the question is, did he actually officially resign or not. The wording in the opening post is ambiguous and OP didn't do himself any favours by putting it into an email rather than discussing it with his line manager. If only he has thought to start this thread prior to the email!
singlecoil said:
CraigJ said:
I emailed HR stating that i intended to resign on the 30th of June 2015.
Seems perfectly clear to me. The employers are using it as an excuse to act illegally, hoping that they will get away with it, and they still might if you don't take action.The OP clearly asks whether notice should be given in writing one month before.
This smacks of local action with a HR Advisor telling the line manager what is legal. Only if it was in danger of going to court would a proper lawyer be consulted imo.
Jonsv8 said:
Vee said:
To intend to do something is just that. It is not a definitive action..
Exactly..."I am writing to give notice that I shall be leaving XXXXX. I intend to leave on the 30th of June 2015.
The first part is definitive, the date is not.
singlecoil said:
Jonsv8 said:
Vee said:
To intend to do something is just that. It is not a definitive action..
Exactly..."I am writing to give notice that I shall be leaving XXXXX. I intend to leave on the 30th of June 2015.
The first part is definitive, the date is not.
The second is not, as in I'd like that to be the end of June. According to his contract, this needed to be accepted by his employer.
I'm pretty sure all those that think what happened by the employer is lawful also recognise the following:
- the employees intent was to work a longer notice period.
- if it was appropriate (ie not going into competition) then they'd have looked much more favourably on the extended notice
- garden leave was put in his contract because it was recognised up front, before he joined, that there are occasions when it would not be appropriate to even allow people on site during notice. Doing the same job for someone else would count as an example.
- wish the employer had not tried to give the longer notice period in the way he did as this presented the problem
- probably wish the employee wasn't leaving at all as good employees are hard to find plus it's just cost them 20k+ (extrapolating the employees take home pay to the cost of recruitment)
Jonsv8 said:
Nope.. The first part is definitive as in 'I resign'
The second is not, as in I'd like that to be the end of June. According to his contract, this needed to be accepted by his employer.
Why do you think it is acceptable to focus on one sentence out of context to the content of whole email?The second is not, as in I'd like that to be the end of June. According to his contract, this needed to be accepted by his employer.
Jonsv8 said:
singlecoil said:
Jonsv8 said:
Vee said:
To intend to do something is just that. It is not a definitive action..
Exactly..."I am writing to give notice that I shall be leaving XXXXX. I intend to leave on the 30th of June 2015.
The first part is definitive, the date is not.
The second is not, as in I'd like that to be the end of June. According to his contract, this needed to be accepted by his employer.
Jonsv8 said:
Nope.. The first part is definitive as in 'I resign'
You're absolutely right, the opening sentence is definitive, although not in the way you wish. The OP states he is giving notice. He then goes on to state the date he will be leaving, that he understands he is exceeding his contractual requirements and to ask if a formal notice needs to be given nearer the time. Note; the employee is giving his notice and the decision about the date to which the notice relates is his to make.The employer has responded by unilaterally giving him their own one month notice and terminating his contract.
For the purposes of this discussion what the employee wants to do post-termination is irrelevant. I don't see what grounds the employer has to terminate his contract.
The handbook/contract says one to three months notice then sets out the formula to calculate which results in:
1 Year service requires 1 Month.
2 Years service requires 1 Month + 1 Week.
3 Years service requires 1 Month + 2 Weeks.
The OP says he has worked there "over 3 years" therefore according to the employer's own terms require minimum of 1 Month + 2 Weeks notice.
The employer doesn't have the right to vary the contract/handbook unilaterally and the OP clearly doesn't agree with the variation.
Further as the drafting party, the employer cannot interpret ambiguous terms in their favour, they must apply the least beneficial interpretation to themselves and the most beneficial interpretation to the none drafting party.
The employee while not specifically mentioning 'Garden Leave' does reserve the right to not assign any work to the employee.
Therefore the employer does owe the OP two more months pay at a minimum.
I suggest OP send strongly worded letter (consider having a solicitor write this) setting out demand for two months salary based on these facts. The letter should also make clear that if they refuse this request then you wish to invoke the companies grievance procedure and explicitly setting out that you are reserving the right to take your grievance to ACAS if you requirements are not satisfied.
1 Year service requires 1 Month.
2 Years service requires 1 Month + 1 Week.
3 Years service requires 1 Month + 2 Weeks.
The OP says he has worked there "over 3 years" therefore according to the employer's own terms require minimum of 1 Month + 2 Weeks notice.
The employer doesn't have the right to vary the contract/handbook unilaterally and the OP clearly doesn't agree with the variation.
Further as the drafting party, the employer cannot interpret ambiguous terms in their favour, they must apply the least beneficial interpretation to themselves and the most beneficial interpretation to the none drafting party.
The employee while not specifically mentioning 'Garden Leave' does reserve the right to not assign any work to the employee.
Therefore the employer does owe the OP two more months pay at a minimum.
I suggest OP send strongly worded letter (consider having a solicitor write this) setting out demand for two months salary based on these facts. The letter should also make clear that if they refuse this request then you wish to invoke the companies grievance procedure and explicitly setting out that you are reserving the right to take your grievance to ACAS if you requirements are not satisfied.
Edited by Martin4x4 on Saturday 4th April 09:01
Martin4x4 said:
The handbook/contract says one to three months notice then sets out the formula to calculate which results in:
1 Year service requires 1 Month.
2 Years service requires 2 Months.
3 Years service requires 3 Months.
The OP says he has worked there "over 3 years" therefore according to the employer's own terms require 3 month notice.
The employer doesn't have the right to vary the contract/handbook unilaterally and the OP clearly doesn't agree with the variation.
Further as the drafting party, the employer cannot interpret ambiguous terms in their favour, they must apply the least beneficial interpretation to themselves and the most beneficial interpretation to the none drafting party.
The employee while not specifically mentioning 'Garden Leave' does reserve the right to not assign any work to the employee.
Therefore the employer does owe the OP two more months pay at a minimum.
I suggest OP send strongly worded letter (consider having a solicitor write this) setting out demand for two months salary based on these facts. The letter should also make clear that if they refuse this request then you wish to invoke the companies grievance procedure and explicitly setting out that you are reserving the right to take your grievance to ACAS if you requirements are not satisfied.
Wrong again. It's 1 week for each years service. Min 1 month. 3 years is 3 weeks ergo 1 month.1 Year service requires 1 Month.
2 Years service requires 2 Months.
3 Years service requires 3 Months.
The OP says he has worked there "over 3 years" therefore according to the employer's own terms require 3 month notice.
The employer doesn't have the right to vary the contract/handbook unilaterally and the OP clearly doesn't agree with the variation.
Further as the drafting party, the employer cannot interpret ambiguous terms in their favour, they must apply the least beneficial interpretation to themselves and the most beneficial interpretation to the none drafting party.
The employee while not specifically mentioning 'Garden Leave' does reserve the right to not assign any work to the employee.
Therefore the employer does owe the OP two more months pay at a minimum.
I suggest OP send strongly worded letter (consider having a solicitor write this) setting out demand for two months salary based on these facts. The letter should also make clear that if they refuse this request then you wish to invoke the companies grievance procedure and explicitly setting out that you are reserving the right to take your grievance to ACAS if you requirements are not satisfied.
Martin4x4 said:
The handbook/contract says one to three months notice then sets out the formula to calculate which results in:
1 Year service requires 1 Month.
2 Years service requires 2 Months.
3 Years service requires 3 Months.
No, it say one week per year, minimum one month maximum three months.1 Year service requires 1 Month.
2 Years service requires 2 Months.
3 Years service requires 3 Months.
OP worked three years, so one month.
Russ T Bolt said:
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.
In my experience it common for larger companies to make these sort of 'mistakes'. Their size breeds a degree of arrogance about how they can act and presumed 'routine stuff' is often handled by unqualified admin staff. There are plenty of posters here exhibiting the same sort of Dunning Kruger behaviour.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.
The key is to trigger a reaction that makes them say WTF and take the situation to somebody that does know what they are doing and has the authority to sort things out in a satisfactory way.
Jonsv8 said:
Martin4x4 said:
The handbook/contract says one to three months notice then sets out the formula to calculate which results in:
1 Year service requires 1 Month.
2 Years service requires 2 Months.
3 Years service requires 3 Months.
The OP says he has worked there "over 3 years" therefore according to the employer's own terms require 3 month notice.
The employer doesn't have the right to vary the contract/handbook unilaterally and the OP clearly doesn't agree with the variation.
Further as the drafting party, the employer cannot interpret ambiguous terms in their favour, they must apply the least beneficial interpretation to themselves and the most beneficial interpretation to the none drafting party.
The employee while not specifically mentioning 'Garden Leave' does reserve the right to not assign any work to the employee.
Therefore the employer does owe the OP two more months pay at a minimum.
I suggest OP send strongly worded letter (consider having a solicitor write this) setting out demand for two months salary based on these facts. The letter should also make clear that if they refuse this request then you wish to invoke the companies grievance procedure and explicitly setting out that you are reserving the right to take your grievance to ACAS if you requirements are not satisfied.
Wrong again. It's 1 week for each years service. Min 1 month. 3 years is 3 weeks ergo 1 month.1 Year service requires 1 Month.
2 Years service requires 2 Months.
3 Years service requires 3 Months.
The OP says he has worked there "over 3 years" therefore according to the employer's own terms require 3 month notice.
The employer doesn't have the right to vary the contract/handbook unilaterally and the OP clearly doesn't agree with the variation.
Further as the drafting party, the employer cannot interpret ambiguous terms in their favour, they must apply the least beneficial interpretation to themselves and the most beneficial interpretation to the none drafting party.
The employee while not specifically mentioning 'Garden Leave' does reserve the right to not assign any work to the employee.
Therefore the employer does owe the OP two more months pay at a minimum.
I suggest OP send strongly worded letter (consider having a solicitor write this) setting out demand for two months salary based on these facts. The letter should also make clear that if they refuse this request then you wish to invoke the companies grievance procedure and explicitly setting out that you are reserving the right to take your grievance to ACAS if you requirements are not satisfied.
Probably best he checks with somebody who knows how to read a contract properly first before firing off letters demanding compensation and making a fool of himself.allergictocheese said:
Jonsv8 said:
Nope.. The first part is definitive as in 'I resign'
You're absolutely right, the opening sentence is definitive, although not in the way you wish. The OP states he is giving notice. He then goes on to state the date he will be leaving, that he understands he is exceeding his contractual requirements and to ask if a formal notice needs to be given nearer the time. Note; the employee is giving his notice and the decision about the date to which the notice relates is his to make.The employer has responded by unilaterally giving him their own one month notice and terminating his contract.
For the purposes of this discussion what the employee wants to do post-termination is irrelevant. I don't see what grounds the employer has to terminate his contract.
He then goes on to offer to vary his notice period.
This is not about the semantics of what he meant, it's clear what he intended.
This is about what he actually did. He resigned.
If that email is not a resignation then he's ok. If it is, and I read it as it is, then the clock started and all his requests to leave at a later date, different forms of correspondence etc are offers and requests to clarify the process.
Revert back to early posts where the crux of this is simply that: was this a resignation? Or was it a conditional offer, seeking information or something else. And I maintain the words 'I am writing to give notice... ' is a resignation.
The employer has stated in their response they see this as a resignation. They are not dismissing him.
PurpleMoonlight said:
I would argue that an employer cannot impose 'exactly' one month notice anyway, because that may be impossible to serve because months vary in the days in them. That is why the legislation provides for minimum notice in weeks.
I get paid the same amount every month. Some months are longer. So more b
ks. PurpleMoonlight said:
No, it say one week per year, minimum one month maximum three months.
OP worked three years, so one month.
While I did transpose months for weeks in the first draft, that doesn't change my fundamental point.OP worked three years, so one month.
The minimum is one month and two weeks and the maximum is three months.
The OP gave three months, which clearly falls within the limits.
Also as non-drafting party of the contract/handbook, the interpretation favours the OP.
Therefore three months notice correctly given.
Edited by Martin4x4 on Saturday 4th April 09:14
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff