Notice handed in getting nasty

[Setanta12]

There are tonnes of references to B&L.

These Waterford jobs, rather interestingly, happened when Rochester lost out in the late 80s. Over 60% of their products was exported back to the States, where the Raw Materials / IP etc came from. We won initially through the IDA and the old 10% rate - which increased by 25% to our new rate of 12.5%.

(You could say we borrowed these jobs for 25 years and now returning them)

 

[Purple]

I see a contract as being two way. Both sides should honour it. Or negotiate an alternative.

She has requested 5 weeks. As of yet she has not broken her contract.
If she walks out after 5 weeks without agreement then she will breaking it.

While contracts are a two way agreement restricting a person is a bigger deal than restricting a business.

 

[ang1170]

She has requested 5 weeks. As of yet she has not broken her contract.
If she walks out after 5 weeks without agreement then she will breaking it.

While contracts are a two way agreement restricting a person is a bigger deal than restricting a business.

It's worth pointing out that the last post from the OP included the statement "Time to just suck it up and hope the new place will wait." That doesn't to me sound like they're about to break the contract. Small wonder it was their last post given the accusations and tone of some of the comments made.

I'd also agree that while on the face of it a contract is a two way agreement, in many cases there is a very significant imbalance in the relative power of the parties involved.

 

[Frank]

Not looking for the Joe Duffy response just advice and experience the very reason for a forum.

Am aware of the legal requirement.
The biggest problem I have is the MD feeling he can talk down to and threaten whomever he feels like.

 

[Leper]

Let's assume the current job is not associated with the next attempt by NASA to put a man on the moon or that it is one which will immediately end starvation in Africa. Let's make this a regular mundane job.

If the employer introduces a clause into the employment contract like " Notice to Quit shall be six months" just because he can; do you think this is acceptable? Let's be more adventurous and have him write "Notice to Quit shall be nine months".

There will always be those on here who will say the contract is binding so stop moaning and serve out your nine months because that is what you signed. This is the kind of person who has got Ireland into the dreadful state it is in. Ireland of the Sacred Cows.

 

[Setanta12]

I disagree.

If there is a dispute let it go to court - if the employer wins, he will be compensated for his loss. How would that be valued? (Ans:- it wouldn't be)

 

[Setanta12]

This is the kind of person who has got Ireland into the dreadful state it is in. Ireland of the Sacred Cows.

A touch too much dramatic licence there, by any chance ?

 

[Brendan Burgess]

If the employer introduces a clause into the employment contract like " Notice to Quit shall be six months" just because he can; do you think this is acceptable? Let's be more adventurous and have him write "Notice to Quit shall be nine months".

.

Hi Leper

Would you sign a contract with a 9 month notice period in it?

Brendan

 

[Leper]

Yes Brendan, I would, if I were looking for work. Contracts of Nine Months, Six Months, Three Months - what's the difference in real terms? When you're goin' to leave, you are goin' to leave. There is nothing wrong with four weeks notice for most jobs.

For the Record:- When I was an employer I had no difficulty in accepting notice of a few days to quit from any employee. In fact, I hoped the employee would leave asap as training new recruits was not too difficult. You do not have to be an Artist to draw conclusions and I believe employing somebody who wants to be part of the team is better than somebody who wants to get out of the team. Common Sense is not so common, you know. In some cases where an employee left my employ I used to keep the post vacant for quite some time to enable him/her to come in from the cold, if necessary.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

Contracts of Nine Months, Six Months, Three Months - what's the difference in real terms? When you're goin' to leave, you are goin' to leave.

So you see the contract as one sided.

It gives the employees rights but no obligations.

That is just crazy.

I agree with your approach as an employer. I would not put in a 3 months notice period. But if I did, I would respect it and I would expect the employee to respect it as well.

 

[RainyDay]

Maybe she should just declare bankruptcy?

Because everyone on AAM knows and agrees that it's OK to walk away from your contractual commitments once you declare bankrutpcy? Hell, the AAMers will even tell you be way/place/judge to do your bankruptcy.

 

[Time]

Contrast that to the view a few years ago when any mention of bankruptcy brought on howls of "you must pay your debts, you signed a contract!".

 

[ang1170]

So you see the contract as one sided.

It gives the employees rights but no obligations.

That is just crazy.

No more crazy or one sided than an employer seeking a 20% pay cut, methinks.

Just what is the big difference between this - which apparently is OK - and asking for a reduced notice period - which apparently is not OK?

I keep saying it that someone should not just take the reduced notice period (i.e. break the contract), but have simply pointed out that it is in effect unlikely to be enforceable. Personally I wouldn't take that step, both on principle (don't break something you entered into if possible) and because it would not be good for one's reputation.

The realities of life are such that regardless what's written into contracts, employers are able to ask for pay cuts and employees are able to ask for reduced notice periods. This is an entirely consistent position. It does not mean that anyone's suggesting anyone sees a contract as one sided, or there to be ignored.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Frank,

As I am sure you can see opinion is divided and has taken a direction that may be irrelevant to your enquiry.

You say that you are aware of your fiancé’s contractual obligations, but that your main concern is the behaviour of the managing director.

In this respect, I am not clear as to matter on which you seek advice, perhaps you would clarify.

 

[Leper]

So you see the contract as one sided.

It gives the employees rights but no obligations.

That is just crazy.

I agree with your approach as an employer. I would not put in a 3 months notice period. But if I did, I would respect it and I would expect the employee to respect it as well.

You said it yourself Brendan, you would not put in a 3 months notice period. Then you go on to say "But if I did, I would respect it" - Come On! You and I know there is no need for a 3 months notice to quit period.

Some other slave to Sacred Cows earlier pointed out that some companies insist on a 3 months notice to quit period but the start of the notice period is at the first day of the following quarter.

Do these guys think that some Call Centre Jockey is going to wait around for several weeks and then for a further three months before accepting a better job? Would you think him disrespectful if he did? The employee has obligations to himself and his family and probably to his mortgage supplier.

If I were employing this guy and he informed me that he is working out his months and months of notice because he is "contracted" I would inform him to keep working where he is and you ain't coming to my place. I would want people who can make decisions themselves.

 

[Ceist Beag]

Maybe she should just declare bankruptcy?

Because everyone on AAM knows and agrees that it's OK to walk away from your contractual commitments once you declare bankrutpcy? Hell, the AAMers will even tell you be way/place/judge to do your bankruptcy.

Love it, nail on head RainyDay!

 

[Sunny]

Maybe she should just declare bankruptcy?

Because everyone on AAM knows and agrees that it's OK to walk away from your contractual commitments once you declare bankrutpcy? Hell, the AAMers will even tell you be way/place/judge to do your bankruptcy.

I don't get your point. You have a problem with people getting advice on bankruptcy on a site called askaboutmoney? I also don't get your point about people walking away from their contractual obligations. What do you think bankruptcy is? What do you think companies do with their contractual obligations when they go into liquidation?

 

[elacsaplau]

I agree with Brendan that the terms of the contract should be respected absolutely.

My problem is that I started a new job 2 weeks ago. On paper, it all looked good. A six figure basic, bonus up to 40%, car, pension, shares, healthcare, etc.

On Tuesday afternoon of last week, my boss asked me to have a report ready for him for first thing on Wednesday morning. When I told him that I anticipated that this would take at least 6 hours, he gave me a "and your problem is" type look.

My contract is 9 to 5, Monday to Friday with a reference to exceptionally having to work outside these hours. When I consulted my new colleagues, I was advised to get used to it as that's just the way it is around here.

So what do I do? I have noticed that pretty much all of my colleagues work in excess of the contracted hours and I really feel very uncomfortable about the prospect of having to work in an environment in which I am expected to consistently act in breach of my contractual terms.

 

[Purple]

I really feel very uncomfortable about the prospect of having to work in an environment in which I am expected to consistently act in breach of my contractual terms.

That's a big legalistic. How many hours a weeks are you talking about? Is there any reciprocity from the employer if employees need some time off during the day etc.? You seem to have a very well paid job. Do you expect to just walk away from it at 5 each evening?

 

[RainyDay]

I agree with Brendan that the terms of the contract should be respected absolutely.

My problem is that I started a new job 2 weeks ago. On paper, it all looked good. A six figure basic, bonus up to 40%, car, pension, shares, healthcare, etc.

On Tuesday afternoon of last week, my boss asked me to have a report ready for him for first thing on Wednesday morning. When I told him that I anticipated that this would take at least 6 hours, he gave me a "and your problem is" type look.

My contract is 9 to 5, Monday to Friday with a reference to exceptionally having to work outside these hours. When I consulted my new colleagues, I was advised to get used to it as that's just the way it is around here.

So what do I do? I have noticed that pretty much all of my colleagues work in excess of the contracted hours and I really feel very uncomfortable about the prospect of having to work in an environment in which I am expected to consistently act in breach of my contractual terms.

WHat kind of research did you do on the employer and the job before you made the decision to join this firm?