Penalties of leaving before notice is up?

Johnny Bitte

Hi all,
Been looking for a new job for a while now but hopefully will find one soon.

Anyway heres the catch, I ve work for the company for 2 years now and been treated well. Even promoted once or twice. With the last one came a new contract in which I have to give 2 months notice!!

I have avoided signing this thing like the plague and so far so good but when I go to resign it will come out that I havent.

Will there be any side effects other than the boss been pissed?

What would happen if I did sign and then only gave a months notice?

Lastly, anyone here ever give 2 months when applying for a new job and actually got it?

I cant see how any one could get a new job when they have to give 2 months notice.

Climate Expert

I cant see how any one could get a new job when they have to give 2 months notice.

Exactly, people walk out all the time. The only time you ever hear of legal action been taken is for the top CEO jobs or football players.

Eoin

I had a 3 month notice period in my last company, which was a real pain when I was looking for a new job. When I did leave, I negotiated a 6 week notice period. As it was Christmas, it suited the new company for me to start in the new year rather than over the Christmas break, so it worked out well in the end.

You could first try and have the clause in the contract changed. You could say that you are just trying to keep it equivalent to the industry standard.

There's not a huge amount they can do in reality if you did leave with a month's notice, but personally I would try and leave on as good terms as possible. I don't see why an employee should act any less professionally then they would like their employer to act.

Incidentally, the law may also be on your side to some degree, but it would have to get quite serious to get this far: If a clause in a contract is deemed unreasonable, and the rest of the contract can still make sense without this clause, then the clause can be dropped altogether. It's called the "blue pencil test". As per usual, I'm not a lawyer, so take that with a pinch of salt - but I did have this checked out by a solicitor last year because I was concerned about the 3 month notice period.

Climate Expert

I'm fairly sure 3 month notice periods are legallly uunbinding.
Your workers rights would take precedence over this.

kayos

One thing I’ve learned from contracting is the following

If there is anything that you do not wish to sign up to in a contract get your pen cross it out and sign above it. If they accept the contract like that they have then agreed to the amendments you have made.

Eoin

Climate Expert wrote: »

I'm fairly sure 3 month notice periods are legallly uunbinding.
Your workers rights would take precedence over this.

The statutory notice period only takes precedence if the notice period in the contract is less than the minimum set out by law.

If it's more like in this case, then it becomes a subjective call so I doubt it's as open and shut as you are making out.

seamus

The_Goose135 wrote: »

Anyway heres the catch, I ve work for the company for 2 years now and been treated well. Even promoted once or twice. With the last one came a new contract in which I have to give 2 months notice!!

Depends on how high up the promotion is then and whether you can be easily replaced from within. Notice periods are meant to reflect the usual time and effort required to effectively replace you. For most people in full time positions, this is in the region of 4 weeks. For people in more specialised or management positions, this is often 2 to 3 months, though for very specialised or well-paid positions, it could be anything up to and beyond a year.

I have avoided signing this thing like the plague and so far so good but when I go to resign it will come out that I havent.

Will there be any side effects other than the boss been pissed?

It depends on company policy and just how pissed the boss is. If it turns out that you never signed/accepted your new contract, then the company could theoretically initiate an action against you to reclaim the money that you've been overpaid since your last promotion - since you never signed the contract, you never accepted your salary increase.

There may also be some degree of an implied acceptance of the contract - you received the thing, received extra money without saying anything, and worked on a basis that was consistent with the terms of the new contract, therefore you accepted the new contract, even though you didn't sign it. I have no idea if such an argument is accepted, but it may be.

What would happen if I did sign and then only gave a months notice?

They could take you to court for breach of contract and to attempt to receover any losses incurred through your being absent for that month (work not done, revenue lost, etc).

I cant see how any one could get a new job when they have to give 2 months notice.

If the notice period is appropriate to your positions, skills & experience, then any potential employer will accept that you have a 2 month notice period.

Climate Expert wrote: »

I'm fairly sure 3 month notice periods are legallly uunbinding.
Your workers rights would take precedence over this.

Workers rights are irrelevant in this case. You can sign a contract requiring you to give a year's notice if you wish.

One argument which can be made is that the notice period is unfair, as it effectively prevents you from seeking alternative employment. However, it would require a court ruling to decide that that part of the contract is unfair and release you from it. So you would still end up in a courtroom.

Surion

Hi all,
The 2 or 3 months thing is actually not 'legally' binding at all, in the sense the OP has stated it. Under your contract (as with all) you are obliged to work and they are obliged to remunerate you for said work. The notice period, which is all it is 'notice', concerns the 'advice' either party must give the other. In fact, often times the company may 'buy you out' by putting you on Garden Leave (full notice period paid as normal, although you aren't allowed work during this) or lump sum. Depends how fast they want to draw down the shutters.

End result; should you wish to leave earlier, you must advise them at the point of resignation (in writing naturally!) and you simply forfeit any right to remuneration for the remaining period of the contract that you are not fulfilling...i.e. working for.

Incidentally, I lost a position due to having a 3 month notice period, but got a higher position later on in my search. Though I must admit, it just so happened to work well for all parties involved. It depends on the level of management you've reached...the higher, generally, the longer....

ifiwasonlyrich

Depending on your pay...if you get paid weekly, you only have to give one weeks notice. two weeks, etc. One month. You haven't signed the contract, so your not bound by it.

Climate Expert

All jobs have contracts now. I think any contract that aims to curtail the job mobility of a worker will not be legally binding.

Eoin

Surion wrote:

End result; should you wish to leave earlier, you must advise them at the point of resignation (in writing naturally!) and you simply forfeit any right to remuneration for the remaining period of the contract that you are not fulfilling...i.e. working for.

So, you can choose to leave tomorrow, but not get paid? Doesn't sound right at all.

Climate Expert wrote:

All jobs have contracts now. I think any contract that aims to curtail the job mobility of a worker will not be legally binding.

Yes, but as has been said already, it has to go to court before it can be struck from the contract.

"Blue Pencil Test" below:

seamus wrote: »

One argument which can be made is that the notice period is unfair, as it effectively prevents you from seeking alternative employment. However, it would require a court ruling to decide that that part of the contract is unfair and release you from it. So you would still end up in a courtroom.

seamus

Surion wrote: »

Hi all,
The 2 or 3 months thing is actually not 'legally' binding at all, in the sense the OP has stated it. Under your contract (as with all) you are obliged to work and they are obliged to remunerate you for said work. The notice period, which is all it is 'notice', concerns the 'advice' either party must give the other.
...
End result; should you wish to leave earlier, you must advise them at the point of resignation (in writing naturally!) and you simply forfeit any right to remuneration for the remaining period of the contract that you are not fulfilling...i.e. working for.

Really, really, really depends on the company. Most contracts state that you "must give X weeks' notice in writing of your intention to leave the company". This doesn't have any provision for reducing said period yourself.

ifiwasonlyrich wrote: »

Depending on your pay...if you get paid weekly, you only have to give one weeks notice. two weeks, etc. One month. You haven't signed the contract, so your not bound by it.

Completely incorrect.

Climate Expert wrote: »

All jobs have contracts now. I think any contract that aims to curtail the job mobility of a worker will not be legally binding.

Probably. You would need a court to decide that the contract curtails your job mobility however. Unless a clause on the contract states that, "You may not leave the company".

leeroybrown

ifiwasonlyrich wrote: »

Depending on your pay...if you get paid weekly, you only have to give one weeks notice. two weeks, etc. One month. You haven't signed the contract, so your not bound by it.

As Seamus pointed out above this is completely incorrect. Notice periods in Ireland are not related to pay periods. In the absence of any explicit notice period in a contract there are statutory notice periods based length of service.

Continuing to work under the terms of an unsigned contract for a sufficient period could be ruled as being implied as accepted. So if the OP accepted his promotion, new responsibilities and improved pay terms but avoided signing his contract it could still become binding.

Also, if the OP is in a position where replacing him effectively is now more difficult due his increased responsibility then a two month notice period could quite easily be defined as reasonable. I've worked for employers in the past where this was standard practice: one month for standard employees (after probation), two months for more senior employees and three months or more for senior managerial staff in critical positions. Given the difficulty of recruiting suitable people to those positions the long notice periods were very reasonable.

Stheno

The_Goose135 wrote: »

Hi all,
Been looking for a new job for a while now but hopefully will find one soon.

Anyway heres the catch, I ve work for the company for 2 years now and been treated well. Even promoted once or twice. With the last one came a new contract in which I have to give 2 months notice!!

I have avoided signing this thing like the plague and so far so good but when I go to resign it will come out that I havent.

It's quite possible that even though you haven't signed it, it's implied as accepted by your employer.

Lastly, anyone here ever give 2 months when applying for a new job and actually got it?

I cant see how any one could get a new job when they have to give 2 months notice.

Yes I was offered my current job two months in advance of starting it, due to contractual issues I resigned the position I was with a months notice, but due to my employer at the time asking if I could be flexible given deadlines that needed to be met, I negotiated with my current employer to start at a time that suited both them and my employer at the time.

TBH, it held me in good stead, my employer at the time was very grateful that I was able to stay and complete the work, and my current employer percieved my wanting to work with my former employer to assist them in a good light in terms of how I would potentially treat them.

My current contract states that I have to give three months notice, the first question a lot of recruiters ask when I am speaking to them is "how much notice do you have to give" so imo for some roles, it's a given that more than a months notice may be required and employers factor that into the recruitment process.

HTH

Johnny Bitte

Thanks for all your help guys, have an interview today.

Surion

The_Goose135 wrote: »

Thanks for all your help guys, have an interview today.

there is a vast differing opinion out there I guess! However, leaving 'legal opinion/advice' aside a moment, the other key issue is the practical issue.

Should you not wish to stay on in a company, and you make it know, no employer will retain staff in such a position. Think of the damage (depending on position in company) that could follow?

I think on practical reasoning, the OP would be very safe to either verbally renegotiate to leave ahead of period in contract or forfeit salary. Unless very high-up in the contract (a) the company will not pursue the expense of lawyers and definately not courts and (b) may well be too considered about replacement possibilities.

Johnny Bitte

Just got word back and the word is no.

The second I said 2 months the IT manager and HR rep look at each and secretly said "No ****ing chance mate"

They then asked why as I am only in my position 2 years.

I had No answer to that.

Try to convince them at this point that this wasn't set in stone but it was no good.

I m so disappointed. Been working in Dublin for 3 ****ing years now, renting Monday to Friday barely get 2 days with my family, friends and girlfriend.

Speaking of which she is bursting to buy a house.

I know this is a long shot but this is the 15th job I ve applied this year and first interview so if anyone has any tips on getting a job in the midlands please let me know.

P.S. Its 1 month notice from now on, no matter what it says in the contract.

Surion

Sorry to hear that...dare I say it....go sick with stress?? That will shave a month off for you...

Heisenberg.

This post has been deleted.