Employee notice period

[spooks]

We have offered a job to a lad who has handed in his notice to his current employer, they have asked for him to work a months notice as detailed in his contract.

He has told them he wants to leave at the end of this calender month, working 2 weeks notice, as that is the day he gets paid. As of this day he won't be due bonus/ overtime etc , and he wants to start with us on the 1st of next month which suits us also.

What would be the position if he was not to see out his notice period and the likely implications for him, this is a workshop person, not director or manager.

I have said to not fall out with them and that we will wait, but he can't see the point of working past pay day.

Any thoughts please, I would rather when he starts he doesn't have any issues hanging over him

 

[Antonia @limeone.com]

They could pursue him for breach of contract in the County Court but for the 2 weeks involved it is unlikely that they would do so. Most sensible employers do not want a reluctant employee turning in each day and very few of these cases are brought into court.

 

[dev99]

How long has he been with the current employer

 

[dev99]

How long has he been with the current employer

 

[DavidRyves]

The answer is that regardless of his contractual notice period and assuming he has worked for his current employer for more than a month the statutory notice he must give is 1 week. If he no longer wishes to work for his employer beyond this period his existing employer can not enforce his contractual notice period (this is based on the assumption that he is not a 'Senior Executive' where case law is different) because this would contravene anti-slavery laws (forcing someone to work when/where they no longer wish to is considered 'akin' to slavery). He is perfectly within his rights to negotiate a reduced notice period and leave his existing employer and start with you when you wish him to. Unless his employer can demonstrate a significant and quantifiable loss as a result of his breach of contract (or has a gardening leave clause in his contract of employment) there should not be a problem.

 

[spooks]

Thanks for the replies, he has worked in his current position for 3 years, makes you wonder why a longer notice period exists if only 1 week is required!

He is a painter in a bodyshop, he is the most experienced one there but not the only one, there are 3 others, as he is very good at what he does, they probably would struggle when he leaves , would this constitute a significant loss??

 

[Antonia @limeone.com]

As he has given 2 weeks notice according to the first post I cannot see how an employer could sustain a 'significant loss' based on the loss of him in position for 2 weeks.

The statutory notice mentioned in another posting applies only to the employer, there is no statute regarding employee notice ( save for the one week in ERA 1966 S86 which does not apply here as 2 weeks has been given in this case by the employee) so it is all based on the terms of the contract.

Whilst an employer cannot 'force' an employee to physically work out his or her notice period according to their contract they can sue for breach of contract and monetary loss. However on a 2 week gap which seems to be the case here most employers would not bother as the rewards would not make litigation fruitful.

 

What would be the position if he was not to see out his notice period and the likely implications for him, this is a workshop person, not director or manager.
I have said to not fall out with them and that we will wait, but he can't see the point of working past pay day.
Any thoughts please, I would rather when he starts he doesn't have any issues hanging over him

Statutory minimum notice period is 1 week from an employee, however this is normally in the absence of any contract of employment and an employee cannot just give this or any other notice in lieu of what is contained in the contract of employment without the chance of repercussion.

The realistic repercussion in this instance could be a claim for breach of contract, this would amount to losses, so, given that he is a key worker infact as you said, their best. Then it would not be beyond the realms of possibility that they had to hire in a temp to cover for a short period (this would be an unknown cost and would only be damage if it were more than they paid the original employee) So in essence there is not really much to worry about in the way of damages financially (at this point)

The downside for the employee is that not working his notice period would probably result in a bridge burned, and the probaility that they would not re-engage should things not work out with you at some point in the future. Whos to say there could not be some personality clash that was totally unexpected whereby the employee suddenly thought, damn i've made a big mistake.

Nobody can be forced to work notice, its as simple as that, and risks are minimal.
The wiseness of not doing things properly in terminating employment...