Notice period not accepted.

LegacyUser

Long time poster but I am going unreg'ed for this one. As the title suggests, I submitted my resignation, in writing, last week. My contract states that I am required to provide my employer with a notice period of three months but it also states that that period of notice is open to negotiation. Given that I am not a senior member of staff in my team, I decided to offer a notice period of one month. Moreover, three of my colleagues, who had the same role as me, have left the organisation over the past year and they all left after serving and offering one month's notice.

On Friday, my manager's manager called me into an office and he told me that my resignation had not been accepted. He said that the notice period specified in my contract was three months. He also proceeded to tell me that the organisation was planning on assigning me to a lead role on a new project, so they wanted to hold on to me for the full notice period. I find this quite odd because the project in question has a lead already. The lead of the project in question, told another one of my colleagues, another lead, that he "needs to get people that he can work to the bone" to catch up, so I get the impression that I am one of those people and the lead line is nonsense.

Would it be advisable to query why I am being treated differently to other members of staff, with respect to my period of notice or should I just serve the full notice period? If I query this, could this result in problems if I ask for a reference when I leave or are they obliged to give a fair reflection of my time in the organisation, if they are willing to give me a reference. I have been through their internal annual review process and my score was one of the best in the department, top three out of fifty people, so a reference from them would be good to have.

skallywag

ResignationIssues wrote: »

My contract states that I am required to provide my employer with a notice period of three months but it also states that that period of notice is open to negotiation.

This reads to me that you are obliged to give three months notice, but that it can be reduced if both parties agree. Usually unless an employer is really stuck from a resourcing perspective then it's in nobodies interest to have a long notice period, as an employer will normally want an employee who has decided to leave out the door pretty promptly.

Can it simply be the case that things were just quieter at the time that your other colleagues left, so that letting them go within one month was not hurtung any projects?

I would not see anything wrong with querying this though, it's a perfectly reasonable question. As long as you are professional and polite then I can't possibly see it being used against you in any way. On the other hand, if you were to renege on a notice period that you agreed to when signing, then this will certainly go against you from a reference perspective.

Jawgap

Pretty much what @skallywag said - you can query it but if they insist on you honouring the notice period then there's not a lot you can do.

Just as an observation, it's a bit strange them not accepting the month. It's a reasonable period and in my experience most places want you gone if you've decided to leave and handed in your notice. In one place I worked they put you on gardening leave as soon as your notice went in......they didn't give you additional assignments! I can only think they want to engineer a handover period?

jamesthepeach

Seen this happen before. Make sure you get to take your leave when you want during the notice period, not when they want.
And make sure not to do any unpaid overtime for them. They don't do you any favour then you don't to them any

Victor

ResignationIssues wrote: »

He also proceeded to tell me that the organisation was planning on assigning me to a lead role on a new project

Pay rise!

Ghekko

Well I certainly wouldn't be working myself to the bone on the project. Arrive on start time and leave dot on finishing time. Take all allowable breaks and bide your time. Surely an employee checking out isn't the best person to suddenly lead any project. Needless to say your heart won't be in it. Have you a new job lined up already - if so are they willing to wait 3 months (less holidays owed)?

Teyla Emmagan

As far as I know (and wiser minds will confirm) you can't be held to those 3 month notice periods. They're pretty much unenforceable. After all, what are they going to do to you? And I don't believe they stand up legally (i.e. they can't come after you). So I would go back in and say that you will be leaving on the date given and not go into any more discussion about it. Particularly now you know they are planning on getting every last drop of blood out of you. Just say you won't be available after X and don't be railroaded.

cloudatlas

You can shorten the notice period by using your annual leave. That's what I was forced to do as my employer was also unreasonable. It sucks.

pc7

Teyla Emmagan wrote: »

As far as I know (and wiser minds will confirm) you can't be held to those 3 month notice periods. They're pretty much unenforceable. After all, what are they going to do to you? And I don't believe they stand up legally (i.e. they can't come after you). So I would go back in and say that you will be leaving on the date given and not go into any more discussion about it. Particularly now you know they are planning on getting every last drop of blood out of you. Just say you won't be available after X and don't be railroaded.

I had a colleague do this, was brought to about 5 meetings and told they couldn't leave. They just kept stating it was a months notice not three and that was the end of it. There was nothing the company could do, they left to a new job and it's gone great so they don't need a reference. There is nothing they can do to you.

Teyla Emmagan

ResignationIssues wrote:

Would it be advisable to query why I am being treated differently to other members of staff, with respect to my period of notice or should I just serve the full notice period? If I query this, could this result in problems if I ask for a reference when I leave or are they obliged to give a fair reflection of my time in the organisation, if they are willing to give me a reference. I have been through their internal annual review process and my score was one of the best in the department, top three out of fifty people, so a reference from them would be good to have.

There is no such thing as a reference from a company really any more. All they will do now is confirm the dates you worked there and say nothing else. They can't do otherwise. I wouldn't query the above either or you are getting into a conversation/negotiation with them. Just state when you're leaving and that's it. If necessary say you have a job to go to.

touts

Sounds like the current lead on the project may be getting the boot and they had earmarked you as the new lead. Would that be enough to keep you? If not then you really have little choice but to serve the 3 months notice. If you have another job to go to a that wants you in a month perhaps go talk to them and I say you can't get out of the three month notice and see what they will do. Don't cause hassle to try and get out of the current job as you will probably need them to give you a reference in the future.

touts

Teyla Emmagan wrote: »

There is no such thing as a reference from a company really any more. All they will do now is confirm the dates you worked there and say nothing else. They can't do otherwise. I wouldn't query the above either or you are getting into a conversation/negotiation with them. Just state when you're leaving and that's it. If necessary say you have a job to go to.

That is incorrect. Most companies look for references. In fact many have very detailed forms they need to be filled out. They then follow up with telephone calls. There may be information you wouldn't put down on a form but the follow up telephone conversation is an opportunity for one manager to give their real opinion of the employee to the new manager without anything being put down in writing.

LegacyUser

Thanks for the replies. I have a new job but they are not going to wait three months. It is a contract role and they need someone to start within four to six weeks. Luckily, I have two other organisations who have asked me to come back to them if I decide to opt for a permanent role over the contract role that I have. Finding work shouldn't be an issue for me, thankfully.

In response to your post and questions :

Can it simply be the case that things were just quieter at the time that your other colleagues left, so that letting them go within one month was not hurtung any projects.

No, the department is constantly in fire fighting mode. The pressure is always on, timelines are always tight but the project I am working on is in a relatively comfortable state at the moment, by those standards. I can't comment on the new project I am supposed to be working on. I've had no official conversations about the state of it.

I can only think they want to engineer a handover period?

I thought that that would be the case before the new project came up. A replacement is scheduled to join my current project this week and there is going to be a handover period of three weeks before I move to the new project.

Pay rise!

Nope, I've discussed this before; months ago. The pay structure is defined in stone.

You can shorten the notice period by using your annual leave. That's what I was forced to do as my employer was also unreasonable. It sucks.

I have over forty days leave available to me and I don't think they know that, so that may give me some wiggle room.

skallywag

I agree that there will normally be no legal repercussions, but your industry reputation could certainly take a battering.

I myself would never hire someone without speaking directly to a past supervisor. There is no way that I would hire someone who refused to work out the agreed notice period if asked to do so at a previous employer, unless one had a very good reason for not doing so. The chances of the same employee doing the same to me further down the line needs to be factored into any decision.

I think "negotiable" means there can be discussion. I don't think it means you can unilaterally decide what is acceptable to the other party.

promethius

I was in same situation years ago, three months notice in contract, told them i would be gone in a month, the raised the 3 months and said i needed to work it but i told them i'm be gone and left it at that. what are they going to do to you? they won't want to be going down any legal route as it will affect their reputation as a good place to work etc. only thing of course is a reference mightn't be great. 3 months is ridiculous unless you're in very senior role, very few employers would wait 3 months for someone to start.

Jawgap

skallywag wrote: »

I agree that there will normally be no legal repercussions, but your industry reputation could certainly take a battering.

I myself would never hire someone without speaking directly to a past supervisor. There is no way that I would hire someone who refused to work out the agreed notice period if asked to do so at a previous employer, unless one had a very good reason for not doing so. The chances of the same employee doing the same to me further down the line needs to be factored into any decision.

Absolutely. The kiss of death is a bland factually correct reference!

Personally, unless you are absolutely 100% sure you'll never want to work at your current employer again (or anyone there in a more senior role) then I'd try to leave on as good terms as possible. People talk and the last thing you'd want is to gather a reputation for being 'difficult' - in most industries anyway

touts

touts wrote: »

That is incorrect. Most companies look for references. In fact many have very detailed forms they need to be filled out. They then follow up with telephone calls. There may be information you wouldn't put down on a form but the follow up telephone conversation is an opportunity for one manager to give their real opinion of the employee to the new manager without anything being put down in writing.

Yes companies still look for references but as Teyla said, most companies are only releasing the dates worked.

Ive just completed a very rigourous background check where I needed to get references from every company Ive worked for in the last 5 years, and so I approached each one and each one said "Due to our policy we can only provide the dates of employment. No details of performance will be provided".

limnam

Can't understand why companies try to pull this

Why would they want someone around that has no inclination to be there.

I'd give them one month and be gone.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Diziet

Whatever you decide to do, please download and print your performance assessment and keep it safe. You may want to use it in future.

skallywag

limnam wrote: »

Can't understand why companies try to pull this

Why would they want someone around that has no inclination to be there.

I'd give them one month and be gone.

There is normally nothing to be gained at all from having someone around who wants to leave, but that said an employer is fully entitled to ask you to work your notice period if they have no other options from a resourcing perspective. I would say that 95% of the time that one of my team has resigned then I have done my best to allow them to leave ASAP, but there have been rare cases where I have had to ask for the full notice period to be worked, for the one reason that there were no other options on the table.

It's not as if some sneaky trick is being pulled, as the employee signs up to these T&C's when they enter employment.

limnam

skallywag wrote: »

There is normally nothing to be gained at all from having someone around who wants to leave, but that said an employer is fully entitled to ask you to work your notice period if they have no other options from a resourcing perspective. I would say that 95% of the time that one of my team has resigned then I have done my best to allow them to leave ASAP, but there have been rare cases where I have had to ask for the full notice period to be worked, for the one reason that there were no other options on the table.

It's not as if some sneaky trick is being pulled, as the employee signs up to these T&C's when they enter employment.

I'm not disputing there right as an employer.

In this case it sounds like he's not an integral cog in the wheel, he's not in a senior role so his duties could most likeley planned to be deligated around over the 4 week notice period.

In my experience people in their notice period turn off.

The work ethic drops off.
Calling in sick...
Mistakes due to lack of focus on the job etc

I wouldn't want this around for 3 months, I wouldn't want it around for 4 weeks tbh.

It can often generate more work than if they'd left and the work was distributed across the team.

Obviously there will be rare cases when there's no other options but this doesn't sound like that case.

pauliebdub

touts wrote: »

That is incorrect. Most companies look for references. In fact many have very detailed forms they need to be filled out. They then follow up with telephone calls. There may be information you wouldn't put down on a form but the follow up telephone conversation is an opportunity for one manager to give their real opinion of the employee to the new manager without anything being put down in writing.

That's not true, most companies that I've worked for give out very basic information when providing references. They're under no obligation to provide one and they open themselves up to possible litigation if they cause difficulties to a former employee. A reference statement is normally provided which states info like commencement date and leaving date job title.

The only references I got were from colleagues and managers that I was friendly with.

pauliebdub

limnam wrote: »

Can't understand why companies try to pull this

Why would they want someone around that has no inclination to be there.

I'd give them one month and be gone.

Its usually reserved for senior employees or employees who work in a critical area. Pointless and difficult to enforce for junior staff.

bennyineire

I had a 2 month notice period on my last job (4 months ago).
I gave them 1 months notice but my manager brought up the 2 months notice.

I had a firm but polite meeting with HR and my manager (organised by me). I stated that I was leaving in 1 month no matter what but that I wanted to leave on the best terms possible and that if they respected my decision I would work as productively as I could and would work really hard on a good handover document.

In fairness HR were on my side (privately). It all worked out in the end and I left amicably. I have even been in touch with everyone as a catch up recently

touts

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yes companies still look for references but as Teyla said, most companies are only releasing the dates worked.

Ive just completed a very rigourous background check where I needed to get references from every company Ive worked for in the last 5 years, and so I approached each one and each one said "Due to our policy we can only provide the dates of employment. No details of performance will be provided".

It may depend on the industry but I would consider that to be the exception. In companies I've dealt with they may just confirm the dates for staff on the floor where the person has pretty much just been a number especially to management who are separated from them by a layer or two of supervisors and team leaders. But once you move into a leadership role or in industries where the number of staff will be quite small and the skills of the individual will be far more important then references are still very much required. In the past couple of years I have moved company and had to supply two detailed references which were sent to the corporate HQ in the US. I have also filled out reference forms for past reports and spoken to prospective employers even going back to staff who reported to me several companies ago.

LegacyUser

Whatever you decide to do, please download and print your performance assessment and keep it safe. You may want to use it in future.

Didn't think of that, thank you. I will do that first thing in the morning.

Sounds like the current lead on the project may be getting the boot and they had earmarked you as the new lead. Would that be enough to keep you? If not then you really have little choice but to serve the 3 months notice. If you have another job to go to a that wants you in a month perhaps go talk to them and I say you can't get out of the three month notice and see what they will do. Don't cause hassle to try and get out of the current job as you will probably need them to give you a reference in the future.

The current lead is not getting the boot, I can give you a 100% guarantee on that. The majority of the leads and the senior management in the organisation are a very tight-knit bunch. They even socialise together. They have been part of the organisation for well over a decade. This lead has a habit of biting off more than he can chew when it comes to scoping projects and he ends up underestimating the time needed to complete the work. I suspect that he is in the same boat on this project. Management tends to split his projects into smaller pillars, assign a new lead to each of them and say that he is the lead of all the pillars and a mentor to the leads of each pillar. As a lead on a pillar, you cover the lead work for your pillar, when he can't and you also have to cover the work of a full time non-lead team member. I've only been put in this position once before but it's a pretty common occurrence from talking to people who have worked in the organisation for many years.

davo10

As an employer I can tell you this, employers look for references. We are interested in performance, and personality, are you good at your job? are you a good employee?

Written references have value, but the "off the record" phone call is invaluable, trust me, we all make those phone calls.

Leaving on good terms in a small industry is an absolute must. If at interview, when I ask what your notice period is, the applicant says it's 3 months but I can leave when I want, I automatically assume they will do the same to me and the interview ends pretty quick.

ellobee

ResignationIssues wrote: »

I have over forty days leave available to me and I don't think they know that, so that may give me some wiggle room.

if you have forty days holidays left then whats the problem, tell them you are taking your holidays in a months time and by the time your holidays are up your 3 months notice will be served.

limnam

davo10 wrote: »

As an employer I can tell you this, employers look for references. We are interested in performance, and personality, are you good at your job? are you a good employee?

You can look for all you want, I can guanrtee you no employer I've ever worked for would give you what you're looking for. There's too much at risk for a lot of companies to do this.

You'll get the years I worked there my role and nothing else on or off the record.

davo10 wrote: »

Written references have value, but the "off the record" phone call is invaluable, trust me, we all make those phone calls.

I've never had to provide a written reference they're pointless and ones you provide a name and a number are pointless they could be anyone and as mentioned above most companies won't give you any information on or off the record and you shouldn't be contacting anyone that you haven't been told to off the record, I don't think I'd fancy working for you that you break trust before I even start there.

I'm finding more and more in my industry anyway less reference checks and more background check. e.g. did I really work there and what was the role and is my education "real"

In my current job I wasn't asked for any references at all, everyone knows it's mostly BS.

You could get a grumpy old boss anoyed that you left giving you an "off the record" what good is that going to do?

Can the person do what you want them to do?
Is thier experience in the CV "real"?
Are they a cnt in the interview?

Get them in you have 6 months to figure it out anyway.

It's all a merry dance

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

él statutorio

If you have 40 days annual leave to take, do your one month notice period, take 8 weeks holidays (40 days) and go ahead and start the new job.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

touts

Patww79 wrote: »

I've had a few 'off the record' calls made about me and made to me in the past. Very rarely were any of the people that were called, including myself, ever in the position they were advertised as being. It's all a game.

Risky strategy as that's grounds a for instant dismissal if discovered.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

touts

Patww79 wrote: »

Companies aren't supposed to be taking 'off the record' appraisals into account either.

Doesn't bother me now as I had a very legitimate one for my current position so all the other previous are meaningless by now anyway.

Companies can take written or verbal references into account. No law against it. In fact in some industries e.g. childcare you are legally required to phone to confirm the details. Giving false references and contact details in that case is a criminal offence. In theory an individual could sue if a bad reference was given and they felt it was unfair and biased. But they would find it hard and expensive to win and it would be basically career ending as word gets around and no one would touch them again.

davo10

limnam wrote: »

You can look for all you want, I can guanrtee you no employer I've ever worked for would give you what you're looking for. There's too much at risk for a lot of companies to do this.

The benefit of making the call is that the person who it's about doesn't know it was made.

The "risk" is not tangible, the phone call was never "made".

You don't actually know if a call was made, do you? How can you "guarantee" it if your new and old employer don't want to admit to it?

If you are in a position to hire someone and you want to check out a potential new employee, would you tell them you made that call?

skallywag

davo10 wrote: »

As an employer I can tell you this, employers look for references. We are interested in performance, and personality, are you good at your job? are you a good employee?

Written references have value, but the "off the record" phone call is invaluable, trust me, we all make those phone calls.

Leaving on good terms in a small industry is an absolute must. If at interview, when I ask what your notice period is, the applicant says it's 3 months but I can leave when I want, I automatically assume they will do the same to me and the interview ends pretty quick.

I could not agree more with the above, and I frankly fine it bizarre that some contributors to this thread are arguing that references do not matter. Perhaps so in whatever industry they happen to be in, but to me it's just completely alien, as it would be to any professional acquaintances which I have who also hire.

I also favour the route of a five minute phone call rather than a written reference. We usually have interview candidates forwarded to us by recruiters, and I have made it clear that unless a candidate can provide a relatively recent reference who I may speak directly to then the process will not go any further. It does not necessarily need to be the most recent employer, I understand fully that things can end of bad terms from time to time.

I've also often found myself on the other side of the stick and will give frank and open feedback over a call when asked. You would never put anything of the such in writing of course for obvious reasons. To be honest though the feedback I have given has been very positive in nearly every case. Having a named reference from a reputable source who you know will give you glowing appraisal is a huge plus for any interview candidate.

Teyla Emmagan

skallywag wrote:

I also favour the route of a five minute phone call rather than a written reference. We usually have interview candidates forwarded to us by recruiters, and I have made it clear that unless a candidate can provide a relatively recent reference who I may speak directly to then the process will not go any further. It does not necessarily need to be the most recent employer, I understand fully that things can end of bad terms from time to time.

Yes but in this case you are phoning someone hand picked by the interviewee. I have several people I would use as referees in a situation like this. They are all people who would have a good opinion of me (obviously), I'm not going to let you ring anyone I went head to head with for months. That might be someone from company X. If you rang company X though they would just tell you I worked there from [insert dates] and was employed as an [insert job].

I know a guy who was fired from 3 jobs I know of and if you rang his referees you would just get through to one of his smoking buddies (who do genuinely work there) who would tell you what a great guy he was.

So references are all a bit of a swizz these days.

davo10

Teyla Emmagan wrote: »

Yes but in this case you are phoning someone hand picked by the interviewee. I have several people I would use as referees in a situation like this. They are all people who would have a good opinion of me (obviously), I'm not going to let you ring anyone I went head to head with for months. That might be someone from company X. If you rang company X though they would just tell you I worked there from [insert dates] and was employed as an [insert job].

I know a guy who was fired from 3 jobs I know of and if you rang his referees you would just get through to one of his smoking buddies (who do genuinely work there) who would tell you what a great guy he was.

So references are all a bit of a swizz these days.

If ever there was a good reason for making that "off the record" phone call, the above is it, the call doesn't have to be made to the preferred referee, generally in smallish industries, each manager knows someone in the other company.

I don't get the "swizz" bit, few employers will fill an important position without doing some research on applicants. Nothing beats a quiet word with someone you know who worked with the applicant, a candidate can look like a world beater on paper, and be a complete muppet.

skallywag

It depends very much on who you are speaking to and where they are working, e.g. if I speak to an Engineering Manager at a reputable engineering firm then I would usually anticipate an honest feedback. I genuinely do not know anyone in such a position who would be willing to falsely sell a candidate, and I would certainly never do so myself, the damage to my own industry rep would just not be worth it. The first question I would always ask would be whether or not this person reported into you or not. Sure, there is the potential that you are going to be told complete lies, but as I mentioned I do not know anyone who would be willing to damage themselves like that.

davo10

skallywag wrote: »

It depends very much on who you are speaking to and where they are working, e.g. if I speak to an Engineering Manager at a reputable engineering firm then I would usually anticipate an honest feedback. I genuinely do not know anyone in such a position who would be willing to falsely sell a candidate, and I would certainly never do so myself, the damage to my own industry rep would just not be worth it. The first question I would always ask would be whether or not this person reported into you or not. Sure, there is the potential that you are going to be told complete lies, but as I mentioned I do not know anyone who would be willing to damage themselves like that.

I ask, and have been asked by other employers, "would you employ this person again?", if the answer is "no", then no more needs to be said. Nothing derogatory or libellous would be mentioned beyond that one syllable answer.

Diziet

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

This is incorrect - it would be illegal to withhold the holiday pay, it is wages owed after all.

jcd5971

davo10 wrote:

I ask, and have been asked by other employers, "would you employ this person again?", if the answer is "no", then no more needs to be said. Nothing derogatory or libellous would be mentioned beyond that one syllable answer.

A fair few former staff put me down as a reference over the years, in general when I've had calls it's been basic enough questions usually ending in the would you employ this person again.

On a side note though I wish people would tell you when they put you down as a reference, 3 missed calls a few weeks back from an unknown number, I didn't answer as I was on holidays, employer obviously told my old colleague they couldn't verify reference.
He rings me then in a huff.. crazy stuff like if you had actually warned me I'd have taken the bloody call.

I love Sean nos

Why does the employer want to hold on to an employee who plainly no longer wants to be there? Sure, you have an extra person working on a project, but they won't be anywhere near full productivity, yet costing the full amount and their output would have to be checked.

I would never hold on to someone in this way.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Jim2007

limnam wrote: »

In my current job I wasn't asked for any references at all, everyone knows it's mostly BS.

I think your approach is rather careless, the fact that the process is BS as you say means that personal contacts and the quiet word is all the more important.

Just because you were not asked for references does not mean they did not check up on you.... You'd be amazed how much you can gleam from a chatty receptionist or secretary!

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

limnam

davo10 wrote: »

The benefit of making the call is that the person who it's about doesn't know it was made.

Not sure what you're talking about.

most large corps will only take calls through a HR department, no one in that HR department in a "real" HR company will take an off the record call.

davo10 wrote: »

The "risk" is not tangible, the phone call was never "made".

huh

davo10 wrote: »

You don't actually know if a call was made, do you? How can you "guarantee" it if your new and old employer don't want to admit to it?

If you are in a position to hire someone and you want to check out a potential new employee, would you tell them you made that call?

I'm only going to provide numbers for speicific people I pretty much know all ready what they're going to tell you.

Outside of that you'll get a brick wall of a HR department.

You sound like your're working in a spar

limnam

skallywag wrote: »

I also favour the route of a five minute phone call rather than a written reference. We usually have interview candidates forwarded to us by recruiters, and I have made it clear that unless a candidate can provide a relatively recent reference who I may speak directly to then the process will not go any further. It does not necessarily need to be the most recent employer, I understand fully that things can end of bad terms from time to time.

How do you know you're not talking to their brother?

skallywag wrote: »

I've also often found myself on the other side of the stick and will give frank and open feedback over a call when asked. You would never put anything of the such in writing of course for obvious reasons. To be honest though the feedback I have given has been very positive in nearly every case. Having a named reference from a reputable source who you know will give you glowing appraisal is a huge plus for any interview candidate.

people don't tend to give contact numbers of someone who's going to give them a bad reference.