3 months notice

jank

Whats the story with the notcie you have to give to a company when leaving.
I got a new contract there kinda a promotion but they want me to give 3 months notice rather then the usual 1 month.

Is this usual? Legal?
Not even in the job 2 years.

Kinda ties me down here though doesnt it.

Eoin

jank wrote: »

Whats the story with the notcie you have to give to a company when leaving.
I got a new contract there kinda a promotion but they want me to give 3 months notice rather then the usual 1 month.

Is this usual? Legal?
Not even in the job 2 years.

Kinda ties me down here though doesnt it.

I'm in exactly the same position. It sucks, but when I joined it was in the middle of the dot.com crash when developers were a dime a dozen, so a long notice period was a good thing.

Yes, it is legal - the statutory notice period can't be shortened, but longer is fine. It's a very restrictive notice period - generally only senior management should have this kind of notice period.

There's not a huge amount you can do. They are unlikely to negotiate this with you - I just tried myself. It may not be a good thing for HR to know you're looking around. In my case, I don't care, so I was happy to ask them.

All that said, if you refuse to work more than x amount of weeks (e.g. 4 or 6 weeks - something reasonable), and if it were to get to litigation, there is something called the "blue pencil" test, or something like that. In essence, this means that it can be established that a clause in the contract is unreasonable, and if the contract can remain in place with that clause being removed, then you may be alright. Especially if you can prove that other people have been able to leave with less than the 3 months notice. I was hoping that there was some specific legislation about a company not being able to infringe on your ability to find employment which would override this clause, but I've had little joy so far. If it gets to that stage, it's not a nice place to be.

Unfortunately, it means that if you do find a new job, you have to tell them that you think you can give less notice, and hope that your current crowd are reasonable when you hand in your notice.

But, the big problem is that they probably won't sign contracts before you agree a notice period, so it can leave you in an uncertain place.

Edit: just re-read your post. You're not in too bad a position as you're signing a new contract, rather than trying to negotiate a new one. Try telling them that you're happy working with them, but you'd prefer to remain on most of the same terms as your current contract.

leeroybrown

Is it just me or are there more and more employers moving towards longer notice periods for less senior jobs? I've seen situations in technical positions where employers are automatically going to three months notice for jobs that I wouldn't describe as very senior just to reduce staff turnover.

I can't make a legally based comment but some of the situations where I have seen it imposed are quite excessive.

Eoin

leeroybrown wrote: »

Is it just me or are there more and more employers moving towards longer notice periods for less senior jobs? I've seen situations in technical positions where employers are automatically going to three months notice for jobs that I wouldn't describe as very senior just to reduce staff turnover.

Not too sure about that; I've been talking to a good few agencies recently, and they thought it was a pretty excessive notice period for a non-management position.

leeroybrown

eoin_s wrote: »

I've been talking to a good few agencies recently, and they thought it was a pretty excessive notice period for a non-management position.

I definitely agree. I'd be quite reluctant to sign a contract for my current job with a three month notice period but I know of people who are doing similar jobs with that kind of restriction.

kmick

Heres a thought. On your contract cross out the 3 month figure and add in in black pen 1 month. Initial the changes and send it in to the HR department. There is a good chance they will not read it and will just file it. Then when they insist on you working your three month notice period ask them to see where it specified this in the contract. Try to keep a straight face as they fumble, try on different glasses and generally faff about.

If they do read it and catch you out say you will agree to 6 weeks and no more. The market is pretty tight at the moment.

I have seen it work before in relation to buying a car where someone crossed out a clause they did not like and were subsequently ok when the car dealer admitted they never read the signed contract.

I dont know what the legal position is here i.e. do you have to inform them you made changes.

Eoin

leeroybrown wrote: »

I definitely agree. I'd be quite reluctant to sign a contract for my current job with a three month notice period but I know of people who are doing similar jobs with that kind of restriction.

If it was more common I wouldn't have a big problem with it, as I would be in the boat as a lot of other people, so I wouldn't be at a competitive disadvantage.

As it stands however, I am relying on either a new company being very patient - which is unlikely given the non-managerial role, or the good will of my current boss to waive half my notice period. It really adds an unwanted extra bit of hassle into job searching, which I could do without.

jank

Ill try and negotiatie with them down to 6 weeks. Which would not be too bad i suppose.

The Hill Billy

The easiest way to get an employer to waive a 3 month notice period is to say that you are leaving to join a competitor. This is pretty much guaranteed to get you off the premises by the end of the working day & on to some 'gardening leave'.

If, however, your contract prohibits you moving to a competitor for a set period after you finish working for the current employer & you cannot use the above excuse - refuse to say where you are moving to when you hand in your notice.

Soon enough paranoia will set in & they will assume that you are going to a competitor & put you on gardening leave anyway.

leeroybrown

Hill Billy wrote: »

The easiest way to get an employer to waive a 3 month notice period is to say that you are leaving to join a competitor. This is pretty much guaranteed to get you off the premises by the end of the working day & on to some 'gardening leave'.

It's nice to be in a position where your employer will waive notice or garden you just to get you offsite but I would suggest that that doesn't apply to the majority of employees who post here. I certainly wouldn't be gardened and would probably have to work all my notice period.

The Hill Billy

leeroybrown wrote: »

It's nice to be in a position where your employer will waive notice or garden you just to get you offsite but I would suggest that that doesn't apply to the majority of employees who post here.

My post wasn't aimed at the "majority of employees who post here." It was aimed at those who may be subject to a restrictive 3-month notice of termination clause.

leeroybrown

In some ways I agree but I think that an increasing proportion of employers are using long notice periods to make it more awkward for staff to leave in general rather than to protect them from competitors.

Eoin

leeroybrown wrote: »

In some ways I agree but I think that an increasing proportion of employers are using long notice periods to make it more awkward for staff to leave in general rather than to protect them from competitors.

That works both ways though, if more employers insist on the long notice period, the more employers will be willing to wait three months to get someone in - therefore making it less of a problem for the job seeker. I hope.

godtabh

eoin_s wrote: »

the statutory notice period can't be shortened

How much is that?

Eoin

kearnsr wrote: »

How much is that?

Depends on how long you're there. Check out www.citizensinformation.ie or entemp.ie

the_syco

Hill Billy wrote: »

If, however, your contract prohibits you moving to a competitor for a set period after you finish working for the current employer & you cannot use the above excuse - refuse to say where you are moving to when you hand in your notice.

I've bolded the bit that I'm pretty sure is seen as hard to uphold, as anyone in the field that you are employed in is a "competitor".

Found this: http://www.irishjobs.ie/ForumWW/WWIndividualArticle.aspx?ParentID=80&CID=190&ForumTypeID=2815

Contracts with non-compete clauses are legal but have been frowned upon by the court system when the clauses have rigid time and geographic restrictions or do not serve a legitimate business purpose other than preventing employees from seeking employment elsewhere.
“These clauses certainly can be enforceable,” Barry Walsh told WorkWise, “but the courts are generally pro-competition and will carefully stress test such clauses before enforcing them. Each case will turn on its own facts”, he explained

Eoin

the_syco wrote: »

I've bolded the bit that I'm pretty sure is seen as hard to uphold, as anyone in the field that you are employed in is a "competitor".

I'd say that's not the case for a lot of people - a lot of people in IT (for example) could do the same work for any industry out there.

the_syco wrote: »

Found this: http://www.irishjobs.ie/ForumWW/WWIndividualArticle.aspx?ParentID=80&CID=190&ForumTypeID=2815

That's interesting stuff - unfortunately as I thought earlier, it still has to get to the litigation stage before the clauses can be struck out.

the_syco

eoin_s wrote: »

I'd say that's not the case for a lot of people - a lot of people in IT (for example) could do the same work for any industry out there.

If you work in IT support, have certs in stuff like Cisco & Networking, not being able to work in the same profession when you leave the current job will be very uncompetitive. As well as that, it'll stop anyone from getting a better paying job at another company in the same field.

Eoin

the_syco wrote: »

If you work in IT support, have certs in stuff like Cisco & Networking, not being able to work in the same profession when you leave the current job will be very uncompetitive. As well as that, it'll stop anyone from getting a better paying job at another company in the same field.

I understand that clause to stop you working in the same industry as your employer, not the same profession you're working in.

the_syco

eoin_s wrote: »

I understand that clause to stop you working in the same industry as your employer, not the same profession you're working in.

Thats the bit that confuses me. How are they not one of the same?

markpb

You could be working in IT but you're employer could be in finance. The contract stipulates that you cannot work in finance, but are free to work in IT.

In any event, not many employers will invoke this clause for positions below management.

Eoin

the_syco wrote: »

Thats the bit that confuses me. How are they not one of the same?

Your profession is what you do, your industry is what your company does. Sometimes these two may overlap, but not always. For instance, you could move from Tech Support in a hospital to a phone company, so the industry changes from healthcare to telecommunications, but the profession is the same.