Question regarding notice period.

COYW

Just want to get some clarification on the following :

My brother is coming towards the end of his probation period, of six months, in his job. The company in question is not doing well and there have been a number of people let go recently. A new position, to which he is far more suited has come his way. He has interviewed for the role and all went very well. He was delighted with the new job/company and he is pretty confident that they felt the same way in relation to him.

Now, he has two weeks annual leave scheduled for the start of next month, which has been approved. This leave was booked long before the redundancies and financial troubles of the company came to the fore. His contract states that he is required to provide the company with one month's notice when he wishes to leave. I think that this is unusually high but that is an aside. He signed the contract so he has to stand by it.

If he is offered the new role, his notice period and annual leave will overlap. He is happy to work the notice period split around the two weeks annual leave but he is quite worried that the company he currently works for will not agree to this. Are companies happy to split a notice period in this manner or are we making something out of nothing? His potential new employer has been made aware of the situation and they are happy to wait the extra week or so.

goldenhoarde

Once he gives his months notice he should be fine as the holidays are booked. Only issue with the hols is does he have them in his holiday bank.
21 days holiday entitlement (he may have more in his contract but 21 is the min) / 12 = 1 3/4 days a month * 6 = 10.5 days

Get offered the job then worry about it but be sure when he chats to the new company if they offer him something that he needs to give 1 months notice once the contact has been signed!

Eoin

A month's notice is not unusually high (once probation is over), but as you said, he's signed up to it anyway.

As goldenhoarde said, he may not have worked up the entitlement to those days off, so that'd be one thing to look at - though it's 20 days statutory entitlement, not 21.

There's a few options they might look at, but the main thing is that they've approved the leave and he's not looking for a shorter notice period than he's agreed to.

I think the worst case scenario for him is that they deduct whatever days he took off that he wasn't entitled to from his final pay check. I don't think they can cancel the leave without giving him x amount of notice (check out this link to see if that's what I think it says). But if they did that, they'd need to pay him the extra days on top of the full notice period he works - would they want to fork out that extra cash if they're in financial trouble?

I don't think any company would want someone that's resigned to come back after 2 weeks leave to finish up their work; especially if they're in financial trouble. It's an extra 2 weeks pay they have to fork out for someone who isn't going to be at 100%.

Edit: if he resigns before his probation is over (and possibly after, given that he's there under a year), it's possible they could let him go on the spot. But he'd still be entitled to his holiday pay and notice period, so he'd most likely break even.

COYW

Many thanks for the replies. One more thing I forgot to add. The company in question is coming to the end of a key project, which my brother is needed for. It will be finished in two weeks time.

It has been hinted (strongly suggested) by some of his colleagues, particular one who has a personal relationship with the owners, that he will be made redundant once the work in question has been completed. This has happened before. Another staff member was let go a few weeks ago, hours, literally, after his work was approved by the customer. He was only there a few months. If one was cynically minded, you would think that he was employed to clear that mess and let go once the customer was happy.

My brother is considering asking his employer whether work will be available for him after the release, given the previous redundancies, if he is offered the new role. Is this advisable? If he is going to be made redundant, then the notice period is no longer an issue.

Eoin

I don't see what the notice period issue is though? He's willing to honour his contract (and in fact, work longer than needed), but will be taking the leave that's already been approved. He's not asking for any concessions or for anything to be waived.

Mrs OBumble

COYW wrote: »

My brother is considering asking his employer whether work will be available for him after the release, if he is offered the new role. Is this advisable?

Why on earth would he do that? What could he possibly hope to achieve?

Let's see if I've got this straight:


He may be offered a job in a couple of days time. The new employer is willing to wait for him to serve his notice.

He's sure that the current job has work for the next two weeks. There's a chance he'll be let go after that. Possibly quite a high chance if he tells his boss that he's leaving anyway.

In three weeks time (ie start of next month) he has two weeks leave booked. He probably has entitlement to this as paid leave, given that he will have been there for six months by that time.


Is the issues that he has a holiday booked during the two weeks, and wants to be not-working then? If so, the new employer will have to wait five weeks for him.

Is it that he's scared that his leave will be cancelled and he will be asked to work out his four weeks notice instead of being on leave for two weeks of it? (seems unlikely given what you've said about end of project etc).

Or what?

COYW

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Is it that he's scared that his leave will be cancelled and he will be asked to work out his four weeks notice instead of being on leave for two weeks of it? (seems unlikely given what you've said about end of project etc).

Or what?

Thanks again. Firstly, he has no issue working his full notice. His primary concern is that the current employer will cancel his leave on handing in his notice, forcing him to work all four weeks in one go.

I agree that querying the availability of work would be a crazy thing. I have told him this, as have others. This is his first full time role and he is a little anxious over the whole thing. I am telling him what the others have said above but I get the "Are you sure?" response. Just wanted to double check here.

Eoin

COYW wrote: »

Thanks again. Firstly, he has no issue working his full notice. His primary concern is that the current employer will cancel his leave on handing in his notice, forcing him to work all four weeks in one go.

That makes sense. So, if they do that then they'll have to pay his holiday leave on top of the 4 weeks, which could be an expense they'd be slow to take on.

But I think all he needs to know is what notice they have to give him about cancelling leave that's already been approved.

Maybe someone could check if the link I posted earlier means they'd need to give him a month's notice to do that?

Here's the link

The text (emphasis is mine)

20.—(1) The times at which annual leave is granted to an employee shall be determined by his or her employer having regard to work requirements and subject—

(a) to the employer taking into account—

(i) the need for the employee to reconcile work and any family responsibilities,

(ii) the opportunities for rest and recreation available to the employee,

(b) to the employer having consulted the employee or the trade union (if any) of which he or she is a member, not later than 1 month before the day on which the annual leave or, as the case may be, the portion thereof concerned is due to commence, and

(c) to the leave being granted within the leave year to which it relates or, with the consent of the employee, within the 6 months thereafter.

(2) The pay in respect of an employee's annual leave shall—

(a) be paid to the employee in advance of his or her taking the leave,

(b) be at the normal weekly rate or, as the case may be, at a rate which is proportionate to the normal weekly rate, and

(c) in a case in which board or lodging or, as the case may be, both board and lodging constitute part of the employee's remuneration, include compensation, calculated at the prescribed rate, for any such board or lodging as will not be received by the employee whilst on annual leave.

(3) Nothing in this section shall prevent an employer and employee from entering into arrangements that are more favourable to the employee with regard to the times of, and the pay in respect of, his or her annual leave.

(4) In this section “normal weekly rate” means the normal weekly rate of the employee concerned's pay determined in accordance with regulations made by the Minister for the purposes of this section.