Leaving job in 2 months - they're looking for letter of resignation now?

LpPepper

Hi,

As title says I'm finishing up at my current position in about 2 months time as I'm heading to Oz on a 1-year working holiday visa.

I told my manager a few months ago that I was leaving for Oz in the new year and all was fine. About 2 weeks ago he asked if I had a general time line of when I planned on finishing up and I said about 2nd/3rd week of December.

This week he has asked me to do up a letter of resignation confirming the dates so he can give it to HR. According to him HR have already interviewed people to fill my position and they may be starting in a few weeks time (we're short staffed as is).

My question is whether or not this request to provide a letter of intent to resign is to give them an excuse to let me go now or is it just to give HR something concrete so they'll have an idea on timing etc?

Thanks.

closifer

This would be quite normal. You just write a brief letter with your finish date included.

Sup08

The letter can be just a to whom, I will resign on, regards.

Just the bare details of dates.

BrokenArrows

Its normal practice to ask for a letter confirming your intent and a specific date.

Consider the alternative where you dont supply a letter and then deny that you ever said you were leaving!

I love Sean nos

What notice period is specified by your contract OP?

I wouldn't give any more than that. There's no benefit to you from it.

Tenigate

I love Sean nos wrote: »

I wouldn't give any more than that.

The op already gave notice.

P_1

Some places remove benefits once you hand in notice (such as taking holidays and sick leave) so it might be in your interest to give the notice when you're within a month of your end date.

I love Sean nos

Tenigate wrote: »

The op already gave notice.

That was a silly thing to do.

Tenigate

I love Sean nos wrote: »

That was a silly thing to do.

hm, yes and no.

In a year's time, the op may return to Ireland and be happy to return to this employer. The employer will remember the orderly handover, plenty of notice, and time to train in the new employee.

Compare that to an employer who receives only statutory notice, doesn't get the opportunity to hire or cross-train a replacement employee, then learns the employee went to Australia.. something that would have been planned months in advance. That's not leaving on good terms. It's not illegal, but I'd think twice about rehiring or even recommending that employee to another employer in future.

As for the request for a letter ... I'm a bit divided on that. The employer may use it to terminate employment early. More likely they want it for a bureaucratic reason like permission to hire a new employee, or some busy-body in HR who thinks it's the thing to do.

TG1

Tenigate wrote: »

As for the request for a letter ... I'm a bit divided on that. The employer may use it to terminate employment early. More likely they want it for a bureaucratic reason like permission to hire a new employee, or some busy-body in HR who thinks it's the thing to do.

Or some poor HR person who is is just trying to get all the required leaver documents together for audit purposes...

Op it's a totally normal request, once you resign it's usual that a company will want it in writing so the whole thing is documented. You seem to have been very cooperative so far about the whole thing which will be appreciated so I would suggest not ruining the good will you are building up by getting hung up on what is normal process.

the_syco

Say they can afford X amount of staff.
Until you say in writing that you're going, they can't replace you.
Once they have a date, they can get someone in, and get you to train them up.
So they may have you train them in over a month. How hard is your job?

CeilingFly

P_1 wrote: »

Some places remove benefits once you hand in notice (such as taking holidays and sick leave) so it might be in your interest to give the notice when you're within a month of your end date.

What a load of codswallop.

54and56

I love Sean nos wrote: »

What notice period is specified by your contract OP?

I wouldn't give any more than that. There's no benefit to you from it.

And that right there is the type of 1970's Arthur Scargil attitude which we need to bring back because it is so helpful to everyone.

54and56

I love Sean nos wrote: »

What notice period is specified by your contract OP?

I wouldn't give any more than that. There's no benefit to you from it.

And i bet you'd be the very person whinging and crying of the employer adopted the same attitude on redundancies and paid only what they were contractually obliged to.

Neon_Lights

I did the same op, heading in the middle of November.

I just gave 3 months notice so the company were well informed.

If you need any tips or tricks let me know about the visa or what I did leaving work.

Be prepared to have an exit interview too, be very high level and nice, objective if fair to do so (you won't close any doors that way if you need to come back)

exaisle

LpPepper wrote: »

<snip>

About 2 weeks ago he asked if I had a general time line of when I planned on finishing up and I said about 2nd/3rd week of December.

<snip>

"about 2nd/3rd week of December" is too vague. If you're giving notice, your employer is entitled to know the date on which you propose to leave, not just a vague indication, which is what you originally gave.

amtc

Just state your last day of service will be xx December and you would appreciate to receive your outstanding pay and holidays plus a written reference. Thank them for your experience and wish well in the future. Perfectly normal as it's time of year when budgets done and tax.

Paulzx

P_1 wrote: »

Some places remove benefits once you hand in notice (such as taking holidays and sick leave) so it might be in your interest to give the notice when you're within a month of your end date.

That's nonsense. If you have built up holiday entitlements nobody can just "remove" them

Neon_Lights

Paulzx wrote: »

That's nonsense. If you have built up holiday entitlements nobody can just "remove" them

They can dock sick pay though.

I love Sean nos

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

And that right there is the type of 1970's Arthur Scargil attitude which we need to bring back because it is so helpful to everyone.

Feel free to list out the benefits.

P_1

Paulzx wrote: »

That's nonsense. If you have built up holiday entitlements nobody can just "remove" them

What I meant was that after handing in your notice you then can't book holidays.

CeilingFly

P_1 wrote: »

What I meant was that after handing in your notice you then can't book holidays.

But you're leaving, so it doesn't come into it and no matter what your contract of employment applies until the last day.

Giving a specific date is basic manners.

Act an eejit and it can come back and bite you as a previous person I employed found out.

I love Sean nos

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

And i bet you'd be the very person whinging and crying of the employer adopted the same attitude on redundancies and paid only what they were contractually obliged to.

Contractually or legally? Regardless, no one has mentioned redundancy, so your comment is meaningless. Feel free to respond to my actual post, giving reasons why the OP should give more notice than required and how it will benefit him.

54and56

I love Sean nos wrote: »

Contractually or legally? Regardless, no one has mentioned redundancy, so your comment is meaningless. Feel free to respond to my actual post, giving reasons why the OP should give more notice than required and how it will benefit him.

Fair enough so:-

1. It'll demonstrate goodwill to the business owner/business management which will positively influence the reference they give him in the future.

2. It'll leave a good impression which will reflect well on him when he returns from his year off and may want to go back working for the same company.

3. It'll make for a smoother transition of his role which will benefit his colleagues and likely result in their opinion of him being improved. If he's in a trade or specialist type role it's important that you manage the rep you have within your peer group. If you're considered to be a mature, co-operative and helpful person doors will open for you, if you're considered to be a jobs worth who does the minimum necessary doors won't open so easily for you.

4. Being helpful is a positive thing to do and (in general) makes people feel good and positive about themselves which in turn helps our individual mental health.

5. By giving early notice when there is absolutely no downside for the OP rather than waiting until the last second to give the minimum notice required per his contract the OP avoids being remembered as a complete self serving small minded w@nker

I love Sean nos

Thanks. I'll consider these one at a time.

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

1. It'll demonstrate goodwill to the business owner/business management which will positively influence the reference they give him in the future.

Dubious. Not many places give references anymore and those that do tend to give references of the "OP worked here from [insert date] until [insert date]" variety. Personal references are still a thing and are normally given over the phone.

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

2. It'll leave a good impression which will reflect well on him when he returns from his year off and may want to go back working for the same company.

His work over his time there will have a far greater impact than the length of notice given. You're assuming that the same management will still be there and when he handed in his notice will even be recorded. The letter will probably be filed away, but only the date of his employment ending will be recorded in their HR system.

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

3. It'll make for a smoother transition of his role which will benefit his colleagues and likely result in their opinion of him being improved. If he's in a trade or specialist type role it's important that you manage the rep you have within your peer group. If you're considered to be a mature, co-operative and helpful person doors will open for you, if you're considered to be a jobs worth who does the minimum necessary doors won't open so easily for you.

Again, you're speaking about something more relevant to his work performance than his leaving notice. If his employer needs more time to manage his leaving, then they should have either put it into his contract, or be willing to negotiate with him when he gives his notice. Also, depending on what his actual role is, once the OP has announced his leaving, his employer might have a policy of getting him out asap.

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

4. Being helpful is a positive thing to do and (in general) makes people feel good and positive about themselves which in turn helps our individual mental health.

Ah, you're grasping here. :pac: He's not leaving them overnight, he's giving him in contractual notice, which generally starts at 1 month and increases as per length of service. He would get this same benefit from doing a good handover during his regular notice period.

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

5. By giving early notice when there is absolutely no downside for the OP rather than waiting until the last second to give the minimum notice required per his contract the OP avoids being remembered as a complete self serving small minded w@nker

The obvious downside to the OP is that he has to have whatever arrangements he needs in place earlier than he would have otherwise. Any changes in his plans, because he's making them earlier than he might have otherwise, could leave him out of work. That's a pretty big downside.

No one is going to think of the OP negatively for giving his contracted notice. People do it all the time. It's perfectly normal.

54and56

^^^^

Sad.

seannash

I love Sean nos wrote: »

His work over his time there will have a far greater impact than the length of notice given. You're assuming that the same management will still be there and when he handed in his notice will even be recorded. The letter will probably be filed away, but only the date of his employment ending will be recorded in their HR system.
.

Just on this, most HR systems now a days have notes on previous employees, even very basic one have is this candidate eligible for rehire box.
Performance reviews are done through these applications also so there's a lot more recorded on these systems than described above.

Now this doesn't mean that these things are looked at but it is potentially available.

I love Sean nos

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

^^^^

Sad.

That's it? That's your response?

CeilingFly

I love Sean nos wrote: »

That's it? That's your response?

I can't think of ant other response myself.

Sad - very much a working class union attitude you have. Big boss v the worker.

Real 70's attitude.

Thankfully most employees have basic level of decency

I love Sean nos

CeilingFly wrote: »

I can't think of ant other response myself.

Sad - very much a working class union attitude you have. Big boss v the worker.

Real 70's attitude.

Thankfully most employees have basic level of decency

The notice period detailed in the contract was put there by the employer. If they wanted more, they had every chance to make that clear. I don't understand how meeting the expectation is somehow wrong. This is basic contract behaviour. At the point of resignation, either party can still open a negotiation to extend or reduce. Any employer that then took the hump over receiving the notice that they had asked for, in writing, is behaving irrationally.

I've never been in a union.

For people on zero hour contracts, how much notice do you think they should give?

CruelCoin

CeilingFly wrote: »

But you're leaving, so it doesn't come into it and no matter what your contract of employment applies until the last day.

Employers can choose when you go on holidays....

Work them out and then pay the holidays out at the end.

CruelCoin

I love Sean nos wrote: »

No one is going to think of the OP negatively for giving his contracted notice. People do it all the time. It's perfectly normal.

Really depends on the business.
A small business might need more than a month to find a new staff member and train them up. Someone leaving suddenly, and 1 month really is suddenly, puts people under real pressure.

I'd think really poorly of someone giving me the minimum, especially if i gave them more than that during their employment. They'd get the minimum reference in return, x date to x date.

One small business owner saying to another "he worked here x date to x date" and nothing more is effectively a negative reference, given you can't do that in writing anymore.

CruelCoin

I love Sean nos wrote: »

For people on zero hour contracts, how much notice do you think they should give?

Not relevant, the OP isn't on a zero-hours contract.

Do you want us to comment on your own personal situation or something?

I love Sean nos

CruelCoin wrote: »

Really depends on the business.
A small business might need more than a month to find a new staff member and train them up. Someone leaving suddenly, and 1 month really is suddenly, puts people under real pressure.

Then why have a 1 month notice period specified in the contract? Don't offer contracts that don't meet your needs. If you find yourself in such a situation, open a negotiation and change your contract template.

54and56

I love Sean nos wrote: »

That's it? That's your response?

Yep. It completely encapsulates my feeling towards what you had written.

I feel sad for anyone who has such a small minded "us and them" pedantic mentality.

If you can do something helpful without any downside why not just do it and feel good that you are being a decent person rather than be an ar$ehole jobsworth?

I love Sean nos

CruelCoin wrote: »

Not relevant, the OP isn't on a zero-hours contract.

Do you want us to comment on your own personal situation or something?

Not me, no. But I have an ex-colleague who was on a zero hours contract and said that he wouldn't be in the next day. There was a bit of huffing and puffing, but then it was realised that not only was that in the contract terms that he was on, but it was also in the contract in place for his reporting line.

ohnonotgmail

I love Sean nos wrote: »

...

Ah, you're grasping here. :pac: He's not leaving them overnight, he's giving him in contractual notice, which generally starts at 1 month and increases as per length of service.
...

Unless there is something in their contract to this effect this is not the case. The notice that an employee must provide does not increase with their length of service on a purely statutory basis. The notice that an employer must provide does increase with the employees length of service on a purely statutory basis.

I love Sean nos

CruelCoin wrote: »

I'd think really poorly of someone giving me the minimum, especially if i gave them more than that during their employment. They'd get the minimum reference in return, x date to x date.

To be clear, you'd penalise an employee for the incompetence of a company?

54and56

I love Sean nos wrote: »

To be clear, you'd penalise an employee for the incompetence of a company?

To be clear I, as an employer, would definitely look kindly on an employee who months ahead of time knew his departure date for a year away in Australia and gave me notice as soon as he could so I could arrange his replacement. Conversely if the same employee in the same circumstances waited to give me the minimum notice per his contract when he could easily have done the decent thing and given me more notice I'd look less favourably on him and likely reciprocate when the time came to give a reference etc i.e. if he gave me plenty of notice I'd write a warm positive reference whereas if he was a jobsworth and gave me minimum notice I'd give him a the sort of reference which would make clear to any prospective employer that I didn't have a high opinion of him e.g. "OP worked as an XXX from Jan 2014 to Nov 2017". End of. In my experience the latter usually results in a prospective employer calling for an informal reference by phone at which time I'd tell him exactly how the OP had behaved and if he's looking for the sort of person who works to rule then I'm sure he'd quickly offer the OP a job.

LpPepper

Just updating the thread here, and some background info to make the situation a bit clearer.

I work in Sales on a 5hr contract, but have been working full time since leaving college (colleague went on sick leave shortly after I finished college).

I gave written notice last week and my manager said he would write me a nice reference when the time comes. My reasoning for not giving my statutory minimum notice of 1 week is so I don't burn any bridges. In fairness the company has been pretty decent to me and especially my manager so the same decency is due back in my opinion.

The new person who will assume my position once I leave begins next week, though I assume on the same 5hr contract, as they are a part timer (I think they're in college based on what I've heard). My manager has promised me as many hours as possible for the next few weeks until I leave and based on the rosters for the next 2 weeks, he wasn't
lying. And so everyone knows, I stated that the week ending the 15th December is my last, though I may be available if badly needed in the following week.

Hope that updated this thread adequately.

I love Sean nos

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

To be clear I, as an employer, would definitely look kindly on an employee who months ahead of time knew his departure date for a year away in Australia and gave me notice as soon as he could so I could arrange his replacement. Conversely if the same employee in the same circumstances waited to give me the minimum notice per his contract when he could easily have done the decent thing and given me more notice I'd look less favourably on him and likely reciprocate when the time came to give a reference etc i.e. if he gave me plenty of notice I'd write a warm positive reference whereas if he was a jobsworth and gave me minimum notice I'd give him a the sort of reference which would make clear to any prospective employer that I didn't have a high opinion of him e.g. "OP worked as an XXX from Jan 2014 to Nov 2017". End of. In my experience the latter usually results in a prospective employer calling for an informal reference by phone at which time I'd tell him exactly how the OP had behaved and if he's looking for the sort of person who works to rule then I'm sure he'd quickly offer the OP a job.

That's lovely and all, but it's not an answer to the question that I asked.

The notice period requirement specified in the contract didn't get there by magic. The employee didn't put it there. The employer did. If the employer put in a notice period requirement that doesn't work for them, why would they penalise the employee for it?

By the way, your post explains perfectly exactly why the OP shouldn't have told his employer anything until he absolutely had to.

db

I love Sean nos wrote: »

That's lovely and all, but it's not an answer to the question that I asked.

The notice period requirement specified in the contract didn't get there by magic. The employee didn't put it there. The employer did. If the employer put in a notice period requirement that doesn't work for them, why would they penalise the employee for it?

By the way, your post explains perfectly exactly why the OP shouldn't have told his employer anything until he absolutely had to.

You might want to read the post just before your's from the OP.

54and56

I love Sean nos wrote: »

That's lovely and all, but it's not an answer to the question that I asked.

The notice period requirement specified in the contract didn't get there by magic. The employee didn't put it there. The employer did. If the employer put in a notice period requirement that doesn't work for them, why would they penalise the employee for it?

By the way, your post explains perfectly exactly why the OP shouldn't have told his employer anything until he absolutely had to.

You are determined to be obtuse. If you can't or don't want to distinguish between what the decent thing to do is and the technical minimum per the contract that's on you.

FWIW most contracts are drafted using language which requires "a minimum" of one months notice. Would you set off on a journey with the minimum fuel in the tank to get you there or would you appreciate the comfort of having a little extra in case things don't go according to plan?

If the OP wants to give the minimum notice period maybe the employer should reciprocate the give the minimum reference. Quid pro quo.

The OP can do the decent thing, feel good for doing so, help his colleagues ease his replacement in and generally be a decent bloke or he can follow the narrow minded advice you are offering.

54and56

LpPepper wrote: »

Just updating the thread here, and some background info to make the situation a bit clearer.

I work in Sales on a 5hr contract, but have been working full time since leaving college (colleague went on sick leave shortly after I finished college).

I gave written notice last week and my manager said he would write me a nice reference when the time comes. My reasoning for not giving my statutory minimum notice of 1 week is so I don't burn any bridges. In fairness the company has been pretty decent to me and especially my manager so the same decency is due back in my opinion.

Well said and well done. It's nice to be nice and what goes around comes around in my experience. Much better than treating the company like your enemy!!

LpPepper wrote: »

The new person who will assume my position once I leave begins next week, though I assume on the same 5hr contract, as they are a part timer (I think they're in college based on what I've heard). My manager has promised me as many hours as possible for the next few weeks until I leave and based on the rosters for the next 2 weeks, he wasn't
lying. And so everyone knows, I stated that the week ending the 15th December is my last, though I may be available if badly needed in the following week.

Hope that updated this thread adequately.

Thanks for the update and for demonstrating that the right thing to do and the minimum contractual requirement are not the same thing.

CruelCoin

I love Sean nos wrote: »

That's lovely and all, but it's not an answer to the question that I asked.

The notice period requirement specified in the contract didn't get there by magic. The employee didn't put it there. The employer did. If the employer put in a notice period requirement that doesn't work for them, why would they penalise the employee for it?

By the way, your post explains perfectly exactly why the OP shouldn't have told his employer anything until he absolutely had to.

Why give the minimum though?

It costs the OP nothing. Literally nothing.

54and56

CruelCoin wrote: »

Why give the minimum though?

Because if you are a small minded pedantic Pat it makes you feel all big and powerful to be able to stick it to the company.

I love Sean nos

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

Yep. It completely encapsulates my feeling towards what you had written.

I feel sad for anyone who has such a small minded "us and them" pedantic mentality.

If you can do something helpful without any downside why not just do it and feel good that you are being a decent person rather than be an ar$ehole jobsworth?

Happy to be described as "sad" rather than exercise the petty, spiteful, vindictive and cowardly action described by you below.

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

To be clear I, as an employer, would definitely look kindly on an employee who months ahead of time knew his departure date for a year away in Australia and gave me notice as soon as he could so I could arrange his replacement. Conversely if the same employee in the same circumstances waited to give me the minimum notice per his contract when he could easily have done the decent thing and given me more notice I'd look less favourably on him and likely reciprocate when the time came to give a reference etc i.e. if he gave me plenty of notice I'd write a warm positive reference whereas if he was a jobsworth and gave me minimum notice I'd give him a the sort of reference which would make clear to any prospective employer that I didn't have a high opinion of him e.g. "OP worked as an XXX from Jan 2014 to Nov 2017". End of. In my experience the latter usually results in a prospective employer calling for an informal reference by phone at which time I'd tell him exactly how the OP had behaved and if he's looking for the sort of person who works to rule then I'm sure he'd quickly offer the OP a job.

Especially this bit. Would offer the reference to the employee, then sabotage it behind his back later, like a weasel.

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

I'd tell him exactly how the OP had behaved

54and56

Thankfully the OP has shown he's a mature decent person despite your efforts.

I love Sean nos wrote: »

Happy to be described as "sad" rather than exercise the petty, spiteful, vindictive and cowardly action described by you below.

Petty action by employee results in poor reference from employer - shock horror!!

I love Sean nos wrote: »

Especially this bit. Would offer the reference to the employee

Think you need to develop your reading skills or is it possible you are being deliberately misleading?

First of all I wouldn't offer a reference to a jobs worth employee. If asked to provide a reference I would do exactly as I quoted i.e. "OP worked as an XXX from Jan 2014 to Nov 2017"

I love Sean nos wrote: »

then sabotage it behind his back later, like a weasel.

"SABOTAGE" Oh what drama :rolleyes: It would be hard to sabotage a reference which says absolutely nothing positive but the absence of a negative statement in todays litigious world would be clearly understood by any prospective employer. Should such an employer wish to have a call with me to discuss the reference I'd "tell him exactly how the OP had behaved" which may be uncomfortable for you as it doesn't fit your little drama narrative because it's called THE TRUTH. I'd quite happily say the same directly to the OP but these days you can't put anything negative into a written reference for fear of frivolous litigation.

The best reference I ever heard of was given to a guy who had been stealing from a company. It included the line "he did us and I'm sure he'll do you". The sap thought it was a glowing reference but everyone reading it knew exactly what it meant.

What goes around comes around. You gotta love Karma :cool:

I love Sean nos

CruelCoin wrote: »

It costs the OP nothing. Literally nothing.

Not true. Could cost the OP his job.

54and56

I love Sean nos wrote: »

Not true. Could cost the OP his job.

You mean the job he is leaving in a few weeks. Please do enlighten us.

I love Sean nos

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

You mean the job he is leaving in a few weeks. Please do enlighten us.

Well obviously I'm not talking about the OP as he has updated us all on his scenario. But it doesn't take much for giving longer notice to work against you.

1. Employee tenders his resignation. Required notice is 1 month. He gives 2 months. Or 3. Doesn't matter, but it's longer than needed because he wants to be helpful.
2. Employer says thanks and starts the process to backfill.
3. Between handing in his notice and the beginning of his final month, the employee's circumstances change. Family member gets sick. Girlfriend gets pregnant. Whatever.
4. Employee approaches employer and attempts to withdraw his resignation.
5. Employer is sympathetic, but has already hired the backfill and no longer has a position for the employee.

I've seen it happen more than once, in two separate companies located in different countries.