Can an employer ask employee to hand in notice?

grindle

We've received an upper-level email where they've asked that any part-timer taking a break over summer is required to hand in their notice.

Seems a little off to me. Employee in question has been here for years.

Chuchote

Constructive dismissal?

(The whole concept of "a part-timer who's been here for years" is pretty off, tbh. If they're worth employing, they're worth staffing.)

Misguided1

grindle wrote: »

We've received an upper-level email where they've asked that any part-timer taking a break over summer is required to hand in their notice.

Seems a little off to me. Employee in question has been here for years.

Are the asking for notice of resignation or notice of the time they intend to take off over the summer?

grindle

Notice of resignation with intent to give them their P45 with a possibility of being rehired after summer, presumably to make it easier to dump and repeat on a yearly basis and giving them less rights as they'll never be there for the full 12 month period.

pilly

Is it because they're taking the whole summer off? Maybe they're not entitled to that many holidays and so they'll have to give their notice in.

I know from previous experience that employers quickly get pissed off with "part-timers" who decide to take whole summers off and expect to stroll back in the winter.

_Brian

There are definite risks of constructive dismissal anytime an employer suggests employees hand in their notice as an alternative to something and an employer committing this to a letter / email is being very foolish indeed.

However, in this case it could be argued that the employer is denying leave over the summer, as is their right, they are pointing out an obvious alternative for anyone this doesn't suit - leave !

pilly

Chuchote wrote: »

Constructive dismissal?

(The whole concept of "a part-timer who's been here for years" is pretty off, tbh. If they're worth employing, they're worth staffing.)

Some people decide to work part-time you know?

mcgragger

Oh wow - that email could be a ticket to a payout. although alot depends on the workers terms and conditions agreement/ contract.
It does sound odd that there is a job where you can take the summer off!!

I would be seeking a meeting (witnessed) with the employer to get clarification of what it means.
If there is a contract it should all be clear. If not - there are questions to be answered

Chuchote

pilly wrote: »

Some people decide to work part-time you know?

There's no reason a part-timer shouldn't be on the staff.

pilly

Chuchote wrote:

There's no reason a part-timer shouldn't be on the staff.

No-one says they aren't. I don't get your point?

Chuchote

pilly wrote: »

No-one says they aren't. I don't get your point?

If you're on the staff you won't be asked to hand in notice when there's a slack period. Keeping people 'casual' for years on end is a way of scamming the government and the worker on RSI and tax.

AndrewJRenko

They can ask for whatever they want, but an employee can refuse. If they want to fire somebody, they need to make that decision themselves.

ec18

Place I used to work, cleared out all part timers after 3 years before re hiring them so it was counted as a break in service and remove an entitlement to becoming a permanent member of staff

kazamo

Chuchote wrote: »

If you're on the staff you won't be asked to hand in notice when there's a slack period. Keeping people 'casual' for years on end is a way of scamming the government and the worker on RSI and tax.

During a slack period, an employer cannot ask a part employee to hand in their notice.
The slack period may involve a reduction in hours or no hours for the part time employee but the employer cannot transfer the onus onto the employee to terminate the relationship.

Victor

Chuchote wrote: »

The whole concept of "a part-timer who's been here for years" is pretty off, tbh. If they're worth employing, they're worth staffing.

Part-time is not the same as casual or temporary, it just means they work less than (for example) 30 hours per week.

grindle

kazamo wrote: »

During a slack period, an employer cannot ask a part employee to hand in their notice.
The slack period may involve a reduction in hours or no hours for the part time employee but the employer cannot transfer the onus onto the employee to terminate the relationship.

This is what I'd thought as well!

The summers off (and the part-time hours) have been perfect for the employee (who has children), but proposing that an employee hand in a resignation rather than laying them off seems like a means to reducing the company's potential for payout (redundancy) and keeping them in a yearly cycle of reapplying for the same job they've had for a long time.

seamus

kazamo wrote: »

During a slack period, an employer cannot ask a part employee to hand in their notice.
The slack period may involve a reduction in hours or no hours for the part time employee but the employer cannot transfer the onus onto the employee to terminate the relationship.

This.

It all comes down really to the terms and conditions of the employment.

If it's a case that the employer doesn't roster part-timers in for any hours during quiet periods or actively tells them to go away for the summer, then they can't demand that notice is handed in.

But if it's a case that the tradition has been for some part-timers to simply take the whole summer off as unpaid leave, then the employer is just saying that this practice has ended and they are no longer offering unpaid leave in this manner.

A simple litmus test is - if none of the part-timers were to take time off over the summer, would they still be rostered in to work?

If yes, then the employer is fine in what they're doing - assuming the right to take unpaid leave is not included in people's contracts.

If no, then it's likely constructive dismissal.

Misguided1

Are we talking about part-timers (i.e. those who work less than a full working day/week) or fixed term workers who have an end date to their contracts?

I'm going to assume it is fixed term works and not people on a permanent contract.
It is hard to advise without knowing what is written in the contracts. There could be a provision that refers to breaks over the summer period and how they are treated.

I agree that requesting a meeting seeking clarification is the right approach but read the contract first.

delboythedub

pilly wrote:

No-one says they aren't. I don't get your point?

Well said Andrew

delboythedub

AndrewJRenko wrote:

They can ask for whatever they want, but an employee can refuse. If they want to fire somebody, they need to make that decision themselves.

Well said Andrew

jimmycrackcorm

grindle wrote:

We've received an upper-level email where they've asked that any part-timer taking a break over summer is required to hand in their notice.

Employee can simply not take a break. A lot will be determined by what's written in their contract but if there has been a long standing practice, then the employer leaves themselves open to a car in the labour court if the employee doesn't agree to the changes.

kazamo

seamus wrote: »

A simple litmus test is - if none of the part-timers were to take time off over the summer, would they still be rostered in to work?

If yes, then the employer is fine in what they're doing - assuming the right to take unpaid leave is not included in people's contracts.

If no, then it's likely constructive dismissal.

If the part timer is still rostered for work, but chose three months off......p45 time initiated by the employer if the employer really can't wait.

What most employers do is await the return and the employees gets fewer or even no hours as others have taken their role. It requires patience but safer route.

To throw the onus back to the employee seems to be a money saving exercise and to absolve the employer of any responsibility and most of the liability.
Even if the employer has changed policies re summer rosters, doesn't mean the employee makes the first move re ending the relationship.

pilly

Chuchote wrote: »

If you're on the staff you won't be asked to hand in notice when there's a slack period. Keeping people 'casual' for years on end is a way of scamming the government and the worker on RSI and tax.

I think you're misunderstanding the OP. The employer has said IF they want to take the summer off then they have to give in their notice.

Effectively telling them that they can't just take the summer off and stroll back in.

pilly

The amount of people misunderstanding this situation is unreal.

jimmycrackcorm

pilly wrote:

Is it because they're taking the whole summer off? Maybe they're not entitled to that many holidays and so they'll have to give their notice in.

pilly wrote:

The amount of people misunderstanding this situation is unreal.

Are you misunderstanding?

pilly

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Are you misunderstanding?

Not at all.

No-one is entitled to take every summer off. Part-time or full-time.

Employer is basically saying you can't have the summer off anymore.

Chuchote

A lot of assumptions here. I assume that the person "has the summer off" because the work isn't available in summer - ie they're something like a cook in a school that shuts down for the school holidays.

pilly

Chuchote wrote: »

A lot of assumptions here. I assume that the person "has the summer off" because the work isn't available in summer - ie they're something like a cook in a school that shuts down for the school holidays.

Well I suppose OP needs to clarify then.

kazamo

pilly wrote: »

Not at all.

No-one is entitled to take every summer off. Part-time or full-time.

Employer is basically saying you can't have the summer off anymore.

Fully agree and the next logical step is employer terminates employment as employee no longer available and issues P45.

But employer wants employee to hand in their notice as if it was employees idea to leave...........