Notice period from employee to employer

PubMan

Registered User
Messages
14
Hi

I read the key post in relation to Minimum Notice period, however my query is not covered by the page. If my contract indicates that I should give 3 months notice am I legally obliged to give this amount of notice?

PubMan
 
Technically yes since this is a contractual issue between you and your employer. Of course what happens if you breach this clause of your contract is up to the employer.
 
Technically yes since this is a contractual issue between you and your employer. Of course what happens if you breach this clause of your contract is up to the employer.

Regardless of what's in the contract and dependent on what your job is, the employer may not require you to work out your notice and may offer to let you go immediately and pay you in lieu. This could happen if for instance you have access to confidential information of use to a competitor. OTOH if you are doing something critical at the time, there is a greater probability that you might be required to work to the end of the period.

There is a school of thought that employers don't tend to take legal action but that's not a guarantee. Personally I'd be more concerned about the effect that leaving early might have on your reference. I realise that the situation with regard to references has changed, particularly since the Freedom of Information Act, but I maintain that regardless of what might or might not appear in a written reference, what's said to the prospective new employer when he rings up for a confidential (and thus unrecorded) chat is the 'real' reference!
 
What is the situation if the job title and position has been changed by the company from that in which a person originally joined?
 
What is the situation if the job title and position has been changed by the company from that in which a person originally joined?

Since it is effectively a new job, I would imagine you would need a new contract.
 
Thanks for that.

I was wondering whether a person would be justified in giving a notice of less than the contract if the job that had originally been indicated had changed substantially (including Job Title). Surely an employer cannot compell an employee to the three months in these circumstances?
 


If the employer let the person go with two weeks notice would you accept the same justification?
 

Probably not, but the company could sue for breach of contract.
 
I worked for a company (abroad) where I had to give 3 months notice. However once an orderly handover of work was completed, both sides were keen to end things as quickly as possible. Took 4-6 weeks in the end if I remember.
 
Probably not, but the company could sue for breach of contract.

So a company can change the basic job that the contract revolves around and at the same time keep the aspects that suits them but makes it more difficult for the employee to get another job??? Doesnt sound fair to me.
 
It's quite straightforward Dixiefly,

When you join a company you sign an employment contract, most contracts include a clause re notice period. This clause remains in force throughout your employment with the company unless you receive a subsequent contract or letter of amendment of contract which stipulates a change to your notice period. In other words your original contract terms continue to apply unless you receive something in writing that indicates otherwise.
 
Give your notice and go sick for the second month??
 
Basically if you have no personal integrity then break the contract that you and your employer signed in good faith. If you do have any integrity then sit down with them and try to work something out, just like you would expect them to sit down with you if the situation was reversed.