Notice period of 3 months

amibeinshafted

I am actively searching for a new job. I read my contract to double check my notice period. According to my contract, my employer can terminate my contract with one months notice. But if I want to terminate my contract, I have to give a minimum of 3 months notice. Is it legal for an employer to expect me to give them 3 times the notice they would give me?

I am in an entry level position on a 2 year fixed term contract.

jimmycrackcorm

Ignore the three months requirement and give one months notice. That clause cannot be enforced.

jimmynokia

You don't need to give three months, a month is max. However they could hold any pay due to you but that's another story.

Damien360

I had contracts state one month once I was under 5 years there and three months over 10 years. I left after 10 and it was not enforced. No company wants someone inside itching to go for an extended time creating bad vibes for others. It would never be enforced.

Mind you, there is a large company in Newry that actively enforced this clause via lawyers. Always to its Polish staff. Never heard the NI staff say it was enforced. Met at least 10 ex-staff members all over NI in other companies.

Sundance_Kid

jimmynokia wrote: »

You don't need to give three months, a month is max. However they could hold any pay due to you but that's another story.

Is that because the employer only has to give one months notice the OP only has to give one also regardless of whether their contract says 3 months?

Thanks

sf80

No judge would ever rule against you! No one in their right mind would expect you to risk your new role because of a 3 month notice period in a contract role for a juniorish position.

Snotty

jimmynokia wrote: »

You don't need to give three months, a month is max. However they could hold any pay due to you but that's another story.

No they cannot, not mater what a contract says or no mater what terms your break, no company can withhold monies that are due to you for services already rendered.

jimmynokia

Snotty wrote: »

No they cannot, not mater what a contract says or no mater what terms your break, no company can withhold monies that are due to you for services already rendered.

Then can and do it happened to me recently in fact I was made wake a month despite giving two weeks notice.

Glass fused light

jimmynokia wrote: »

Then can and do it happened to me recently in fact I was made wake a month despite giving two weeks notice.

You got paid but had to wait a month?

amibeinshafted wrote: »

I am actively searching for a new job. I read my contract to double check my notice period. According to my contract, my employer can terminate my contract with one months notice. But if I want to terminate my contract, I have to give a minimum of 3 months notice. Is it legal for an employer to expect me to give them 3 times the notice they would give me?

I am in an entry level position on a 2 year fixed term contract.

Yes it is legal to have different notice periods in a contract. Employment law just deals with minimum notice.

Yes the company could take you to court for not working the 3 months but it's not normaly economically worth while to do so. Eg if you were in a niche role and they could not find a replacement and suffered a loss you could be held responsible for the loss.

As you are in an entry level position what is likely to happen is that you wont get a positive rating on professionalism. So you need to figure how your current company deal with short notice and in an interview situation have thought about how you will not end up lying about it.

It's important to note that if your starting out you should read and be satisfied with the employment contract you sign. In this instance think aout what the mismatch in notice say about the company and how is this attitude reflected in the company culture.

jimmynokia

Glass fused light wrote:

You got paid but had to wait a month?

I only got my previous two weeks pay on leaving but they made me wait to get my final pay which was a month's pay. I've been onto the required people to do so and it was illegal what they did. There was nothing in my contract to state I've to wait a full month to be given what I was owed despite them getting two weeks notice the company like to financially bully people. They will be seeing the steps soon.

Glass fused light

jimmynokia wrote: »

I only got my previous two weeks pay on leaving but they made me wait to get my final pay which was a month's pay. I've been onto the required people to do so and it was illegal what they did. There was nothing in my contract to state I've to wait a full month to be given what I was owed despite them getting two weeks notice the company like to financially bully people. They will be seeing the steps soon.

You gave 2 weeks notice which was less than what was in your contract?
They made you wait 1 month after leaving to pay over your final pay and there was no term in your contract about it?

amibeinshafted

Glass fused light wrote: »

As you are in an entry level position what is likely to happen is that you wont get a positive rating on professionalism. So you need to figure how your current company deal with short notice and in an interview situation have thought about how you will not end up lying about it.

It's important to note that if your starting out you should read and be satisfied with the employment contract you sign. In this instance think aout what the mismatch in notice say about the company and how is this attitude reflected in the company culture.

I understand where you come with the professionalism part. I feel that the 3 month wait time is to eliminate any other job opportunities. I don't think any employer will be willing to wait 3 months for me to finish up with such entry level skills(first job after college)

The company's culture is treating employees like ****. I was sold this role as a graduate program, but it is an entry level position with little or no training. The only training I'm getting is no relevant to my role(it is a company wide internal program). I have no desire to work for this company, even if they offer me a long term contract. They have no respect for their employees

jimmynokia

Glass fused light wrote:

You gave 2 weeks notice which was less than what was in your contract? They made you wait 1 month after leaving to pay over your final pay and there was no term in your contract about it?

Two weeks notice is all I was required to give

skallywag

It's quite common to come across 3 or even 4 month notice periods in many cases, but I have actually never yet encountered a situation where it was not applied in both directions.

In general I would always advise any employee / potential employee to serve out the agreed on notice to period, but in this case it seems that the terms which you agreed to initially were inherently unfair (although you did however agree to them of course ...).

I would agree that such an imbalance should be a major warning sign for the future and definitely make a strong statement concerning the company culture. I would be keeping well away ...

Snotty

jimmynokia wrote: »

Then can and do it happened to me recently in fact I was made wake a month despite giving two weeks notice.

Withhold meaning never paying you. It sounds like your work was month in lieu and although it was a month after you left, it was normal billing cycle. Just cause you leave doesn't mean your payroll will be processed any earlier

jimmynokia

Snotty wrote:

Withhold meaning never paying you. It sounds like your work was month in lieu and although it was a month after you left, it was normal billing cycle. Just cause you leave doesn't mean your payroll will be processed any earlier

We, all the staff where paid every two weeks.

jimmynokia

Snotty wrote:

Withhold meaning never paying you. It sounds like your work was month in lieu and although it was a month after you left, it was normal billing cycle. Just cause you leave doesn't mean your payroll will be processed any earlier

I might also factor in they changed their pay schedule twice, also all staff had to have a deposit which technically was our own money to begin with. This was a couple of thousand euro too.

Snotty

jimmynokia wrote: »

We, all the staff where paid every two weeks.

Yes but what is that payment for?

For example, I'm paid every two weeks, but I'm a month in lieu so will be paid on week 6 for weeks 1 and 2.
Depending on dates, if I left it would be a month before I got my wages for the last week I worked. Completely normal.

Glass fused light

Snotty wrote: »

Withhold meaning never paying you. It sounds like your work was month in lieu and although it was a month after you left, it was normal billing cycle. Just cause you leave doesn't mean your payroll will be processed any earlier

Technically under the payment of wages act(?) or a SI's an employer was obliged to provide a P45 *edit and by default final wages * when the employee leaves or dies. If a payment is made after this a supplementary P45 should be prepared and sent to revenue.
The company may add to the contract or just pay in the next cycle of the payroll if agreed with the employee. But a company shoud have this provision available with their payroll provider.

Glass fused light

amibeinshafted wrote: »

I understand where you come with the professionalism part. I feel that the 3 month wait time is to eliminate any other job opportunities. I don't think any employer will be willing to wait 3 months for me to finish up with such entry level skills(first job after college)

See this ^^ is important that you realise why this is used and the unequal treatment will raise alarm bells if you see it next time.
You should only sign a contract if you intend to abide by the terms, you can always go back to the HR department if you are unsure or unhappy with a term and ask them to change it. If they won't and the role is worth it you could sign knowing that you will not abide by it but you should always aim to act in good faith and be honest in all your dealings.
Remember you are building a personal (how you act) and professional (how you and your employer act) reputation which will follow you through life.

amibeinshafted wrote: »

The company's culture is treating employees like ****. I was sold this role as a graduate program, but it is an entry level position with little or no training. The only training I'm getting is no relevant to my role(it is a company wide internal program). I have no desire to work for this company, even if they offer me a long term contract. They have no respect for their employees

ok firstly you need to think how you will word your exit strategy (leaving early) in interviews and how to talk about your current company in a non-negative way.
Plus you need to firm up what you want to achieve from your next job and what KPI your new company should have to prove they are willing to invest in you. As your are starting out I would suggest explore, how they encourage additional external training, will they fund it will you be given study days.

Eoin

Sundance_Kid wrote: »

Is that because the employer only has to give one months notice the OP only has to give one also regardless of whether their contract says 3 months?

Thanks

Nope, a contact can't specify a notice period that's less than what employment allows, but a notice period that favours the employer more than the employee is legal. I think 3 months is unfair unless you're C-level staff.

Not giving the notice period that you've agreed to in your contract is breach of contract. It might be very unlikely that the employer pursue it, but that's not the same as it being an invalid clause that is 100% safe to ignore.

Lucas Hood

If you get a new job ring in sick to your old job every day.