Period of Notice

Dubliner28

Hi guys,

Just wondering as a general rule what is the standard notice to give to your boss for your intention to leave the company. I have been working for the company for 8/9 years approx.

Plenty of cover in the office so role would be covered immediately and wouldnt need to give constant training.

Is two weeks okay?

There is nothing in my contact to say.

CassieManson

I think it's related to payroll schedule. If you are paid monthly you would be expected to give a months notice. Can be negotiated to be less if it suits both parties.

Dubliner28

Thanks.

livedadream

if it doesnt say in your contract then the general rule of thumb is

1 week for under 6 months service
2 weeks for over
1 month for 1 year service
3 months for 2 years plus depending on seniority.

it also depends on the company, your role doesnt seem vital and your not the only one doing it so approach with 2 weeks of an offer and see if they accept.

Mrs OBumble

livedadream wrote: »

...the general rule of thumb is

...

3 months for 2 years plus depending on seniority.

I would seriously question that is a rule of thumb.

Three months is excessive and should only be required for very senior managers or very specialist positions.

For most workers, one month is adequate to arrange and complete handover to an interim person if not the final replacement.

ohnonotgmail

livedadream wrote: »

if it doesnt say in your contract then the general rule of thumb is

1 week for under 6 months service
2 weeks for over
1 month for 1 year service
3 months for 2 years plus depending on seniority.

it also depends on the company, your role doesnt seem vital and your not the only one doing it so approach with 2 weeks of an offer and see if they accept.

3 months is completely excessive. if a role is so vital that 3 months notice is required then it will be included in the employees contract. I had that in my contract once and i would never agree to it again. makes it nearly impossible to find another job.

livedadream

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

3 months is completely excessive. if a role is so vital that 3 months notice is required then it will be included in the employees contract. I had that in my contract once and i would never agree to it again. makes it nearly impossible to find another job.

slow your ro there lads i didnt say it was law or even enforceable i said in general...

ohnoontgmail youve had it in a contract, i know its in mine and all of my teams. so while yes its excessive it does happen.

while yes people might be on gardening leave for some of that time its still 3 months.

sometimes it can take that long to find someone suitable for a role.

Penny Tration

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1973/act/4/section/4/enacted/en/html#sec4


Minimum notice and terms of employment act states 4 weeks is the minimum for more than 5, but less than 10 years of service.


However, you may be able to come to a 2 week agreement with your employer if they're happy with it.

ohnonotgmail

livedadream wrote: »

slow your ro there lads i didnt say it was law or even enforceable i said in general...

ohnoontgmail youve had it in a contract, i know its in mine and all of my teams. so while yes its excessive it does happen.

while yes people might be on gardening leave for some of that time its still 3 months.

sometimes it can take that long to find someone suitable for a role.

you said it was a rule of thumb. Its not a rule of thumb that i have ever come across.

ohnonotgmail

Penny Tration wrote: »

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1973/act/4/section/4/enacted/en/html#sec4


Minimum notice and terms of employment act states 4 weeks is the minimum for more than 5, but less than 10 years of service.


However, you may be able to come to a 2 week agreement with your employer if they're happy with it.

I've always had a question about that. That section is about the minimum notice given by employer to employee. It doesnt mention the notice given the other way around. Is that actually stated anywhere in law or is it left to contractual terms?

livedadream

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you said it was a rule of thumb. Its not a rule of thumb that i have ever come across.

you have if it was in a contract you signed though..

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I had that in my contract once

kinda ruins your point there mate.

Penny Tration

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I've always had a question about that. That section is about the minimum notice given by employer to employee. It doesnt mention the notice given the other way around. Is that actually stated anywhere in law or is it left to contractual terms?

Yeah, I mis-read, my mistake. the act actually says notice given by an employee is to be determined by contract. So I guess 2 weeks is plenty, op?

livedadream

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I've always had a question about that. That section is about the minimum notice given by employer to employee. It doesnt mention the notice given the other way around. Is that actually stated anywhere in law or is it left to contractual terms?

Section 6 of the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 1973

If you do not have a provision in your contract of employment dealing with notice, the statutory minimum notice of one week will apply and this is the notice that you should give your employer of your intention to leave

ohnonotgmail

livedadream wrote: »

you have if it was in a contract you signed though..



kinda ruins your point there mate.

huh? that doesnt ruin my point at all. But you've decided to be confrontational about this so i'll leave it here.

livedadream

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

huh? that doesnt ruin my point at all. But you've decided to be confrontational about this so i'll leave it here.

genuinely not being confrontational at all.

rule of thumb means in common use to broadly accurate guide or principle, based on practice rather than theory

the practice of you and i saying we have seen contracts with 3 months notice required shows that.

its used in principle...

as you and i have shown by agreeing that it exists.

no need to be defensive we can discuss it as adults do, its a discussion forum after all.

ohnonotgmail

livedadream wrote: »

genuinely not being confrontational at all.

rule of thumb means in common use to broadly accurate guide or principle, based on practice rather than theory

the practice of you and i saying we have seen contracts with 3 months notice required shows that.

its used in principle...

as you and i have shown by agreeing that it exists.

no need to be defensive we can discuss it as adults do, its a discussion forum after all.

It exists only when stated in a contract.
absent any contractual term a rule of thumb of three months notice is nonsense. it doesnt ( or should i say i have never seen) happen. the only people who give three months notice are those who are obliged to contractually. they are usually very senior people or those with critical skills. so the response you gave to somebody who is not bound by contractual terms is nonsense.

Manach

My own experience was employer was happy to waive notice down from 4 to 2 weeks.

livedadream

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

It exists only when stated in a contract.
absent any contractual term a rule of thumb of three months notice is nonsense. it doesnt ( or should i say i have never seen) happen. the only people who give three months notice are those who are obliged to contractually. they are usually very senior people or those with critical skills. so the response you gave to somebody who is not bound by contractual terms is nonsense.

you realise i agree with you right?
even if its in a contract is still not enforceable.

Eoin

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I've always had a question about that. That section is about the minimum notice given by employer to employee. It doesnt mention the notice given the other way around. Is that actually stated anywhere in law or is it left to contractual terms?

Correct - it is different for employees:

If you do not have a provision in your contract of employment dealing with notice, the statutory minimum notice of one week will apply and this is the notice that you should give your employer of your intention to leave. The statutory minimum notice of one week, is set down in Section 6 of the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 1973. (link)

CassieManson wrote: »

I think it's related to payroll schedule. If you are paid monthly you would be expected to give a months notice. Can be negotiated to be less if it suits both parties.

Nope, that's a (common) myth.

PopTarts

I don't think notice is enforceable anyway. It's just good will though.

Eoin

It may not be practical / worth the cost to enforce in court, but it is legally binding.

toadfly

1 week is all that is required by law

Eoin

toadfly wrote: »

1 week is all that is required by law

Not if your contract says otherwise.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Eoin

Sorry, yeah - correct.

grogi

PopTarts wrote: »

I don't think notice is enforceable anyway. It's just good will though.

Employer could sue in a civil suit for loses because of breach of contract.