Contract Query

[scarr187]

Hi,

I have a general, contract / HR related query.

Does a contract need to be signed in order to be actionable?

A relative recently left their job - they had no contract during their employment but were offered a new contract, didn't sign it and decided to leave instead. They now think they've lost out on some favourable terms contained in the unsigned contract (back money / bonus etc) - do they have ant recourse to the contract. They've had the unsigned contract in their possession for about 4 or 6 weeks.

Do their old terms of employment apply or are the new terms inferred on the basis the contract was given to them?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Leo]

They have no rights under a contract that was not signed by both parties. Think of it this way, if I gave you a contract for the sale of you car or house to me for a tenner, would you think that should automatically become an enforceable contract after 4 or 6 weeks?

 

[scarr187]

Hi Leo,

Thanks for the reply.
I should clarify that they're actually in the process of leaving - I think they finish next week.

I would tend to agree with you on the above - but, does the provision of the contract from the employer to the employee combined with the continued work of the employee not in some way infer tacit acceptance of the provided contract? - and its merely and administrative exercise in terms of signing the contract - but the contracts terms apply for the remaining period of work? The employer has already indicated they're willing to extend the terms to the employee by providing them the contract.

I tend to think not myself but just want perspective of those more knowledable than myself.

 

[Leo]

I would tend to agree with you on the above - but, does the provision of the contract from the employer to the employee combined with the continued work of the employee not in some way infer tacit acceptance of the provided contract? - and its merely and administrative exercise in terms of signing the contract - but the contracts terms apply for the remaining period of work? The employer has already indicated they're willing to extend the terms to the employee by providing them the contract.

I tend to think not myself but just want perspective of those more knowledable than myself.

No, unless the employee had formally indicated acceptance of the terms, the new contract can't be deemed to be in effect. In the reverse scenario the company could not enforce detrimental changes to the employment contract simply by issuing a new contract to the employee.

See the Citizen's Information page for more details.