Notice Period Wording
Discussion
Hi everyone,
I am currently looking to move jobs (got some interviews lined up) but I am wondering about the policy wording regarding my notice period (which is 12 weeks). The company policy states:
"If you terminate your employment without giving and/or working the required period of notice (as stipulated in your contract of employment) the Company reserves the right to deduct one day’s pay for each day of notice you have failed to honour from your final salary, holiday pay, outstanding expenses and or any other payments owed by the Company to you. This is considered to be a genuine pre estimate of the losses the Company will suffer in covering your duties, during any period of notice not worked."
That to me says that if I want to to work 4 weeks notice then the company will pay me for those 4 but not the remaining 12. Is that other people's take on it - or are they saying that not only will they not pay me for those 8 weeks, they will also charge me 8 weeks salary?
I think it's the former but if there's some legal bods who think it's the latter then I will need to take some legal advice!
Cheers.
I am currently looking to move jobs (got some interviews lined up) but I am wondering about the policy wording regarding my notice period (which is 12 weeks). The company policy states:
"If you terminate your employment without giving and/or working the required period of notice (as stipulated in your contract of employment) the Company reserves the right to deduct one day’s pay for each day of notice you have failed to honour from your final salary, holiday pay, outstanding expenses and or any other payments owed by the Company to you. This is considered to be a genuine pre estimate of the losses the Company will suffer in covering your duties, during any period of notice not worked."
That to me says that if I want to to work 4 weeks notice then the company will pay me for those 4 but not the remaining 12. Is that other people's take on it - or are they saying that not only will they not pay me for those 8 weeks, they will also charge me 8 weeks salary?
I think it's the former but if there's some legal bods who think it's the latter then I will need to take some legal advice!
Cheers.
I read it as they will charge you for the number of days that you are not there also.
Practically speaking, a lot of this depends on the company that you work for, and your position, and relationship with your line manager / superiors. I was in a similar position to yourself last year, but got on very well with the people I worked for, and we happily negotiated an early exit after 8 weeks, rather than the stipulated 12 at no issue to anyone. I think most companies realise that making you work your notice where you are going to be demotivated and unhelpful is unlikely to benefit them either.
You might also wish to consider if you have enough leave accrued proportionally, to resign, and then take a chunk of the notice period off as leave - which could make the employer more likely to agree to an earlier termination as an alternative.
Practically speaking, a lot of this depends on the company that you work for, and your position, and relationship with your line manager / superiors. I was in a similar position to yourself last year, but got on very well with the people I worked for, and we happily negotiated an early exit after 8 weeks, rather than the stipulated 12 at no issue to anyone. I think most companies realise that making you work your notice where you are going to be demotivated and unhelpful is unlikely to benefit them either.
You might also wish to consider if you have enough leave accrued proportionally, to resign, and then take a chunk of the notice period off as leave - which could make the employer more likely to agree to an earlier termination as an alternative.
I don't think any of you have got this right. It says they will deduct a day's pay for each day not worked from any money they owe you. So if they owe you nothing they won't be able to charge you anything. However, if you are paid in arrears then they always owe you something. If you have also accrued holiday that you haven't used and have expenses outstanding then they could recover it from these also.
Seems clear to me.
Seems clear to me.
stavers said:
I think it's the former but if there's some legal bods who think it's the latter then I will need to take some legal advice!
The former. If they make a deduction for the remaining 8 weeks (i.e. 12 minus 4) that would mean not only that you wouldn't receive any pay for the 4 weeks, but you would owe them a similar amount (4 minus 8)!gazza285 said:
It say they will deduct one day's pay for each day missed, if you don't go, they won't pay you.
It does not say or imply that you will be charged anything, because there is no legal basis for doing so.
^^This^^It does not say or imply that you will be charged anything, because there is no legal basis for doing so.
If the employer were stupid enough to try, they would be roasted by ACAS and/or a Tribunal - https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunals/overview
They will deduct any days you don't work from any money they owe you at the end of your notice period. So any hours work that are yet to be paid, any holiday entitlment you are yet to use up or any other money they would normally pay you.
If your notice period is 12 weeks and you work 4, they will deduct 8 weeks pay from whatever they owe you at the end. Obviously they can't claim any money back already paid, but you'll end up with £0 at the end.
If your notice period is 12 weeks and you work 4, they will deduct 8 weeks pay from whatever they owe you at the end. Obviously they can't claim any money back already paid, but you'll end up with £0 at the end.
stavers said:
This is considered to be a genuine pre estimate of the losses the Company will suffer in covering your duties, during any period of notice not worked.
That is terrible wording!I can only assume what they mean is that it is an estimate of the cost of finding someone to do your job, since you won't be doing it.
There are no "losses" - either they would be paying you or paying someone else - those are called EXPENSES not losses!!
What concerns me is that they use the term pre estimate of loss.
An employer is entitled to sue an employee for any losses incurred should the employee not serve the required notice period. If it would typically cost the employer twice the salary of the employee to secure short term temporary staff or to pay other staff overtime to cover the employees work, then their loss could be equivalent to the employees days pay.
The employer here appears to be claiming that as a pre estimate of loss.
If the employer simply intended to not pay the individual for not working I doubt they would need to use a pre estimate of loss argument, the employee has left employment so obviously doesn't get paid. The OP's contract goes further than that, even to state the loss will be taken from holiday pay or expenses owed if necessary.
An employer is entitled to sue an employee for any losses incurred should the employee not serve the required notice period. If it would typically cost the employer twice the salary of the employee to secure short term temporary staff or to pay other staff overtime to cover the employees work, then their loss could be equivalent to the employees days pay.
The employer here appears to be claiming that as a pre estimate of loss.
If the employer simply intended to not pay the individual for not working I doubt they would need to use a pre estimate of loss argument, the employee has left employment so obviously doesn't get paid. The OP's contract goes further than that, even to state the loss will be taken from holiday pay or expenses owed if necessary.
walm said:
That is terrible wording!
I can only assume what they mean is that it is an estimate of the cost of finding someone to do your job, since you won't be doing it.
There are no "losses" - either they would be paying you or paying someone else - those are called EXPENSES not losses!!
There could be if they have to use short term agency staff or pay existing staff overtime.I can only assume what they mean is that it is an estimate of the cost of finding someone to do your job, since you won't be doing it.
There are no "losses" - either they would be paying you or paying someone else - those are called EXPENSES not losses!!
PurpleMoonlight said:
What concerns me is that they use the term pre estimate of loss.
An employer is entitled to sue an employee for any losses incurred should the employee not serve the required notice period. If it would typically cost the employer twice the salary of the employee to secure short term temporary staff or to pay other staff overtime to cover the employees work, then their loss could be equivalent to the employees days pay.
The employer here appears to be claiming that as a pre estimate of loss.
If the employer simply intended to not pay the individual for not working I doubt they would need to use a pre estimate of loss argument, the employee has left employment so obviously doesn't get paid. The OP's contract goes further than that, even to state the loss will be taken from holiday pay or expenses owed if necessary.
Ooops - seems like it was deliberate wording then.An employer is entitled to sue an employee for any losses incurred should the employee not serve the required notice period. If it would typically cost the employer twice the salary of the employee to secure short term temporary staff or to pay other staff overtime to cover the employees work, then their loss could be equivalent to the employees days pay.
The employer here appears to be claiming that as a pre estimate of loss.
If the employer simply intended to not pay the individual for not working I doubt they would need to use a pre estimate of loss argument, the employee has left employment so obviously doesn't get paid. The OP's contract goes further than that, even to state the loss will be taken from holiday pay or expenses owed if necessary.
Seems outrageously expensive to me, in that case.
Actual legal view here:
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/experts/article...
PurpleMoonlight said:
walm said:
That is terrible wording!
I can only assume what they mean is that it is an estimate of the cost of finding someone to do your job, since you won't be doing it.
There are no "losses" - either they would be paying you or paying someone else - those are called EXPENSES not losses!!
There could be if they have to use short term agency staff or pay existing staff overtime.I can only assume what they mean is that it is an estimate of the cost of finding someone to do your job, since you won't be doing it.
There are no "losses" - either they would be paying you or paying someone else - those are called EXPENSES not losses!!
stavers said:
I have to say I'm glad it's not just me that thinks this is painfully worded and not clear at all!
I think I will try to talk to my line manager when the time comes and see if I can negotiate something. Otherwise I just wait until pay day and then don't turn up!
I do hope you make it clear to your new employer that you're untrustworthy and will break any agreement you might have with them if it suits you to. I think I will try to talk to my line manager when the time comes and see if I can negotiate something. Otherwise I just wait until pay day and then don't turn up!
REALIST123 said:
stavers said:
I have to say I'm glad it's not just me that thinks this is painfully worded and not clear at all!
I think I will try to talk to my line manager when the time comes and see if I can negotiate something. Otherwise I just wait until pay day and then don't turn up!
I do hope you make it clear to your new employer that you're untrustworthy and will break any agreement you might have with them if it suits you to. I think I will try to talk to my line manager when the time comes and see if I can negotiate something. Otherwise I just wait until pay day and then don't turn up!
stavers said:
I have to say I'm glad it's not just me that thinks this is painfully worded and not clear at all!
I think I will try to talk to my line manager when the time comes and see if I can negotiate something. Otherwise I just wait until pay day and then don't turn up!
It is poorly worded.I think I will try to talk to my line manager when the time comes and see if I can negotiate something. Otherwise I just wait until pay day and then don't turn up!
It can be interpreted that if you don't turn up for the last 6 weeks that they won't pay you not for turning up.
However, I can see that there may be the intention to cover their losses, hence the genuine pre-estimate angle.
It doesn't clearly say that though, and if that is what it meant, they could have been more clear in explaining that not working notice would cause damage to the company, in addition for not paying you for days that you don't work, they will quantify their loss due to breach as your salary rate, and withhold sums owed to you accordingly.
However, don't invite litigation and a bad taste at the end of employment. Sort it out amicably.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff