Any employment lawyers around? Relocation expenses.

[rfisher]

Query about relocation expenses.

If you apply for a job in 2008 and are appointed in 2009 and the employer brings in a new relocation expenses policy between these 2 dates, are you bound by the old policy or can you claim under the new one?

In other words, when does this policy become legally binding, at the point of application or at appointment?

[Custard Test]

I am of the understanding that it is from the point you signed the contract as this is where your legal relationship commences with the company.

If you contract has terms on that are different from what you discussed but you signed and agreed to them then the contract terms precide.

[rfisher]

Thanks for the reply.

Looks like this may need to go up a level or 2.

I'd be interested to receive PM from employment solicitors and an idea of fees charged for acting on behalf of an employee (not me) against an employer.

Ta.

[scirocco265]

rfisher said:

...and an idea of fees charged for acting on behalf of an employee (not me) against an employer.

What is the employee intending to get from the employer? I presume they feel they have been left out of pocket... what sort of figure do they feel they are owed?

[rfisher]

Several £1000.

[bogwoppit]

I guess this might not go down so well in this forum, but... what did this other person expect from the company when they signed the contract? Have the company reneged on their promise, or is the employee just going after the extra cash retrospectively? It sounds like the latter, because if it was in the contract then it'd be a no brainer. And if it were me, I'd interpret a new policy on relocation expenses to apply to "new recruitment" for the coming year, unless is specifically mentioned existing offers. And as usual, if it isn't in the contract I imagine it'd be hard to make a case.

[scirocco265]

Have they already exhausted the grievance procedure?

[rfisher]

For anyone interested the policy that applies is the one in use at the time the post commenced.

Pretty obvious I would have thought, but it required the combined consideration of several individuals from ever increasing management levels within HR before a decision was reached.

[Grey Ghost]

rfisher said:

ever increasing management levels within HR

There's your problem in a nutshell.

HR = Hardly Relevant