Employee Resigned / Payment in Lieu

[jalucia]

An employee resigned today and has a 3 months notice period (*employed <1 year).

Can we give them the option to:

1) leave immediately without pay and they will not work any of their notice or;

2) we pay them one month salary of the 3 month notice period in exchange for them foregoing the further 2 months notice period pay?

Essentially we'd like them to leave and feel option 2 would probably suit both parties. On the other hand if not, then we would request them to work their notice period with full pay BUT expect them to work in full (even if we don't actually give them a full workload).

Your advice appreciated.

 

[pentel]

3 months notice period

I can never understand why people would have this in their contracts. Once someone resigns they have in most cases mentally left the building.

 

[UKSBD]

An employee resigned today and has a 3 months notice period (*employed <1 year).

Can we give them the option to:

1) leave immediately without pay and they will not work any of their notice or;

2) we pay them one month salary of the 3 month notice period in exchange for them foregoing the further 2 months notice period pay?

Essentially we'd like them to leave and feel option 2 would probably suit both parties. On the other hand if not, then we would request them to work their notice period with full pay BUT expect them to work in full (even if we don't actually give them a full workload).

Your advice appreciated.

Whatever you do, word it in a way that makes it looks like you are doing them a favour.

i.e.
We have reviewed your contract and unfortunately you are obliged to work for us for another 3 months. Due the circumstance and taking in to consideration you have only worked for us for X months we are willing to waive this...

Or words to that effect

 

[Lisa Thomas]

One for @Newchodge I think...

 

[Newchodge]

An employee resigned today and has a 3 months notice period (*employed <1 year).

Can we give them the option to:

1) leave immediately without pay and they will not work any of their notice or;

2) we pay them one month salary of the 3 month notice period in exchange for them foregoing the further 2 months notice period pay?

Essentially we'd like them to leave and feel option 2 would probably suit both parties. On the other hand if not, then we would request them to work their notice period with full pay BUT expect them to work in full (even if we don't actually give them a full workload).

Your advice appreciated.

You can ask them anything you like, but they have the right to continue working for you and be paid in full for 3 months.

During that 3 months you should not do anything that might be seen as forcing them to leave - examples I have seen include moving their desk into the corridor next to the toilets; only giving them work that is well below their grade, including, for example, cleaning the toilets; refusing to allow them to take their luch break until everyone else has returned from theirs; cancelling pre-booked holidays etc. These could give rise to an unfair (constructive) dismissal case.

And review your contracts. Why ask people to give 3 months' notice if you don't wnat them to?

 

[IanSuth]

What you should do in an ideal world (assuming not going to a direct competitor) is tell them you are thankful for what they have done, want them to be involved in finding and inducting a replacement and get on with that asap. If you are lucky it will take a month to find one, they will be on a months notice and you will still have a months handover allowing an orderly transition with more chance of the replacement sticking.

Obviously if they are leaving because of something you have done (like unfulfilled promises) you might not want them talking to a prospective replacement - but only you know the why's and wherefores

 

[jalucia]

You can ask them anything you like, but they have the right to continue working for you and be paid in full for 3 months.

During that 3 months you should not do anything that might be seen as forcing them to leave - examples I have seen include moving their desk into the corridor next to the toilets; only giving them work that is well below their grade, including, for example, cleaning the toilets; refusing to allow them to take their luch break until everyone else has returned from theirs; cancelling pre-booked holidays etc. These could give rise to an unfair (constructive) dismissal case.

And review your contracts. Why ask people to give 3 months' notice if you don't wnat them to?

3 months is a protection clause and becoming standardised in my/many industry I work in unfortunately. it's done simply because 1) high cost to recruit / paying recruiters 2) staff churn on the whole - I'm sure you're aware of the global shift in staff having no loyalty to businesses any longer, changing roles every 9-12 months. They have no qualms about throwing the towel in and job hopping. So with 3 months you somewhat protect your investment even if it's true that staff will check out when resigning. We work in professional services so need the reassurance of knowing that we have them to hand if we need them but in this situation we actually wanted to get rid of the staff anyway so will aim to accelerate their exit (fairly)

 

[jalucia]

What you should do in an ideal world (assuming not going to a direct competitor) is tell them you are thankful for what they have done, want them to be involved in finding and inducting a replacement and get on with that asap. If you are lucky it will take a month to find one, they will be on a months notice and you will still have a months handover allowing an orderly transition with more chance of the replacement sticking.

Obviously if they are leaving because of something you have done (like unfulfilled promises) you might not want them talking to a prospective replacement - but only you know the why's and wherefores

thankfully on this one we are happy to see the back of them. it's just not working. So agree to your sentiment above and we'll aim to fairly exit them and provide a few options e.g. work out the notice period or pay a months salary on the basis that they can leave now and not have to work any further. Then they can make the decision but we're wanting them to go

 

[Newchodge]

3 months is a protection clause and becoming standardised in my/many industry I work in unfortunately. it's done simply because 1) high cost to recruit / paying recruiters 2) staff churn on the whole - I'm sure you're aware of the global shift in staff having no loyalty to businesses any longer, changing roles every 9-12 months. They have no qualms about throwing the towel in and job hopping. So with 3 months you somewhat protect your investment even if it's true that staff will check out when resigning. We work in professional services so need the reassurance of knowing that we have them to hand if we need them but in this situation we actually wanted to get rid of the staff anyway so will aim to accelerate their exit (fairly)

I have never heard of anyone being deterred from leaving because of the length of notice they have to give. Generally, someone who has decided to leave has little interest in their sonn-to-be-ex employer and some can cause real harm during their notice period. I really cannot see how requiring 3 months' notice is of any real asistance.

 

[jalucia]

I have never heard of anyone being deterred from leaving because of the length of notice they have to give. Generally, someone who has decided to leave has little interest in their sonn-to-be-ex employer and some can cause real harm during their notice period. I really cannot see how requiring 3 months' notice is of any real asistance.

its quite simple - put yourselves in the position of a professional services industry. Your staff is responsible for managing 5 clients, collectively worth £1m in fee revenue. They are the point person for the client accounts. They resign. You have no one immediately to replace them. You can let them go immediately but then you put yourself and the clients in jeopardy. You put feasibly £1m fee revenue at risk because you have no solution/replacement. Hiring in today's economic environment (and my sector specifically give the high demand) can take 3 or 6 months. The lengthy notice period of 3 months is becoming increasingly standardised even at the junior and mid levels, 6 months for senior staff. 3 months gives you breathing space to work out your next play and aim to keep the clients in tact without creating much turbulence thus salvaging the £££ until you have additional support..

 

[BubbaWY]

thankfully on this one we are happy to see the back of them. it's just not working. So agree to your sentiment above and we'll aim to fairly exit them and provide a few options e.g. work out the notice period or pay a months salary on the basis that they can leave now and not have to work any further. Then they can make the decision but we're wanting them to go

Has your employee got another job? If so, they may jump at the chance of working just a months notice, or leave straight away which may suit all parties.

 

[jalucia]

Has your employee got another job? If so, they may jump at the chance of working just a months notice, or leave straight away which may suit all parties.

we feel they'll jump at the chance of being able to leave within a month. Don't believe they have another job yet but they seem to struggle with the workload due to competency which is a shame.

 

[IanSuth]

its quite simple - put yourselves in the position of a professional services industry. Your staff is responsible for managing 5 clients, collectively worth £1m in fee revenue. They are the point person for the client accounts. They resign. You have no one immediately to replace them. You can let them go immediately but then you put yourself and the clients in jeopardy. You put feasibly £1m fee revenue at risk because you have no solution/replacement. Hiring in today's economic environment (and my sector specifically give the high demand) can take 3 or 6 months. The lengthy notice period of 3 months is becoming increasingly standardised even at the junior and mid levels, 6 months for senior staff. 3 months gives you breathing space to work out your next play and aim to keep the clients in tact without creating much turbulence thus salvaging the £££ until you have additional support..

I did recruitment in IT (which included a lot of high end consultancies) for 27 years until 2 years ago.

Never (well maybe once) in all that time did anyone work out a 3 month notice period when they were offered a job. I knew and they knew that it is a toothless clause, what are you going to do if you want them to work 3 months and they won't ?

And if you are unable/willing to use it on offence then what purpose does it serve other than costing you in this instance.

"Because it is becoming standard" is the worst reason ever.

As for agency fees let me explain how it is to your disadvantage. All agency rebate periods start form day 1 of employment and finish on the last day of employment, if you have a 3 month notice period from day 1 and a 3 month sliding scale rebate (ours was 2 weeks 100%,2-5 weeks 50% 5-12 25%) then if they resign/are dismissed after 1 month you are getting nothing (their last day of contracted work will be after the end of the scale. If you have a 6month notice period and a 6 month rebate you will have the same issue, and as for a 6 month notice and a 3 month rebate well why bother.

Why is it not working - what is wrong with this person in this job ? Spend the time working it out before you repeat the issue.

In 27 years I think i had less than a dozen people drop out for hiring mistakes - of course there were some lured back to their old company or who received another offer just after they started from an application they had been pursuing for a while but rarely do people not work out 6-9 months into a job for a reason that can't be identified to stop a repeat waste of money

 

[IanSuth]

we feel they'll jump at the chance of being able to leave within a month. Don't believe they have another job yet but they seem to struggle with the workload due to competency which is a shame.

If they struggle due to competency why was this not picked up in interview or from a reference (and i mean actually talking to an ex employer or client not from a pointless HR piece of paper saying nothing), what competency based testing/interviewing did you do to avoid this.

And worse of all, how come it has taken over 6 months to realise they couldnt do what you took them on to do ? Did they pass probation (if so how) ? If they didn't then you can get rid of them quicker on competency grounds (assuming you have a proper process in place).

I am worried a professional services firm (which likely therefore requires industry examinations to have been passed) is unable to spot incompetency within 6 mths.

What precisely can they not do or do they struggle with which is making them take longer to carry out the work and I will tell you how to measure that in your replacement.

 

[jalucia]

I did recruitment in IT (which included a lot of high end consultancies) for 27 years until 2 years ago.

Never (well maybe once) in all that time did anyone work out a 3 month notice period when they were offered a job. I knew and they knew that it is a toothless clause, what are you going to do if you want them to work 3 months and they won't ?

And if you are unable/willing to use it on offence then what purpose does it serve other than costing you in this instance.

"Because it is becoming standard" is the worst reason ever.

As for agency fees let me explain how it is to your disadvantage. All agency rebate periods start form day 1 of employment and finish on the last day of employment, if you have a 3 month notice period from day 1 and a 3 month sliding scale rebate (ours was 2 weeks 100%,2-5 weeks 50% 5-12 25%) then if they resign/are dismissed after 1 month you are getting nothing (their last day of contracted work will be after the end of the scale. If you have a 6month notice period and a 6 month rebate you will have the same issue, and as for a 6 month notice and a 3 month rebate well why bother.

Why is it not working - what is wrong with this person in this job ? Spend the time working it out before you repeat the issue.

In 27 years I think i had less than a dozen people drop out for hiring mistakes - of course there were some lured back to their old company or who received another offer just after they started from an application they had been pursuing for a while but rarely do people not work out 6-9 months into a job for a reason that can't be identified to stop a repeat waste of money

interesting insights. Our staff is responsible for losing clients and unfortunately that means loss of revenue to the company. They are responsible for large sums of revenue leaving the business because they are unable to satisfy the client and/or deliver against their KPIs agreed between the client and our business. It's very much a scenario of incompetence and despite all efforts with the staff it's not going to work. It's carrying dead weight and at a cost to our growth so best to sever ties. We already have a solution in place we're ready to action (with other resource) so the sooner the better.

 

[IanSuth]

Also if they have no job to go to then why would they give up 2 months extra money - you have just said it takes 3-6 months to find people in your industry, that means recruitment processes are dragged out by "he looks okay but we don't want to make a choice form one, we need a comparator", so what I think will happen is he will initially say "no" to your offer whilst looking. Only once he is pretty sure he has something lined up will he consider an early get out and suddenly take you up on your offer and want out in a hurry then.

 

[IanSuth]

interesting insights. Our staff is responsible for losing clients and unfortunately that means loss of revenue to the company. They are responsible for large sums of revenue leaving the business because they are unable to satisfy the client and/or deliver against their KPIs agreed between the client and our business. It's very much a scenario of incompetence and despite all efforts with the staff it's not going to work. It's carrying dead weight and at a cost to our growth so best to sever ties. We already have a solution in place we're ready to action (with other resource) so the sooner the better.

then be prepared to pay them the full 3 months in lieu of notice and be glad they are gone

But the question remains - why were they incompetent, what couldn't they do and how can you spot that in others ?

 

[jalucia]

Also if they have no job to go to then why would they give up 2 months extra money - you have just said it takes 3-6 months to find people in your industry, that means recruitment processes are dragged out by "he looks okay but we don't want to make a choice form one, we need a comparator", so what I think will happen is he will initially say "no" to your offer whilst looking. Only once he is pretty sure he has something lined up will he consider an early get out and suddenly take you up on your offer and want out in a hurry then.

yes that's probable but our sense is that the staff is so uncomfortable with 'pressure' that they very likely may opt to just get out of the business. Unfortunately this individual struggles with basic tasks and is not conducive to pressure. They are well paid and we have junior members performing much better at half the salary. We expect more. They can stay the 3 months if they like but we will move them to the backend and ensure we're getting deliverables in the meantime. Hoping though to sever ties sooner and we all move on our ways.

 

[jalucia]

then be prepared to pay them the full 3 months in lieu of notice and be glad they are gone

But the question remains - why were they incompetent, what couldn't they do and how can you spot that in others ?

we are fully prepared to pay 3 months as is contractually obliged. On the question of competence, some people are, some people aren't... Perhaps the individual in question is in the wrong job who knows. It doesn't work though and we will be better investing in a resource where we have less issues, and can continue to grow the business without losing revenue on account of a poor employee.

 

[HFE Signs]

We've had several situations over the years where we've paid them for the notice period but asked them not to work, for both security of data and as mentioned above they have mentally already left. Equally we've had some that have worked out their notice to the last day and left on very good terms. This is a decision you make per case.

 

[IanSuth]

we are fully prepared to pay 3 months as is contractually obliged. On the question of competence, some people are, some people aren't... Perhaps the individual in question is in the wrong job who knows. It doesn't work though and we will be better investing in a resource where we have less issues, and can continue to grow the business without losing revenue on account of a poor employee.

On the question of competence, some people are, some people aren't.

This is the crux - what can some people not do ? If it is a competence it can be measured, if it can be measured it can be assessed up front and you won't repeat. You benchmark using people you consider "good" (not excellent but decent solid performers) and measure applicants against that PRE OFFER

(ps this is what we do - we may not even cover your sector so be irrelevant to you for a solution but the underlying concept is the same - do skills based recruitment, don't just go on gut and a piece of paper)

 

[pentel]

Your staff is responsible for managing 5 clients, collectively worth £1m in fee revenue. They are the point person for the client accounts.

I wouldn't be happy as a client being tied to an uninterested contact who has mentally checked out of dealing with me, slow or even failing to respond. Is that how you want your company to look?