Notice requirement

BuffyBot · 18-10-2002 10:45pm #1

A question I hope someone can offer some info on.

I'm thinking of quitting my job, but I don't wan't to give a months notice. I'd much prefer to just give 1 week.

In fact, I've been there over a year (first 6 months are probationary), but in all the time I've been there no one has confirmed that I've passed my probation and have been made permanent. If you are not permanent you are only required to give 1 week.

Therefore even though I'm still there past probation, and no one has confirmed that I am permanent, I feel I should be able to still give 1 weeks notice - am I correct?

daveirl · 19-10-2002 9:55am

This post has been deleted.

Kali · 20-10-2002 7:08pm

If you didn't get a contract (that you can check) then the minimum for you under law (under 2 years service) is 1 weeks notice... although I'd reccomend giving 2 anyway as most employers would expect that.

Nevyn · 20-10-2002 7:42pm

as ffar as i know it is usually that you give one pay cycles worth of time.
ie if you get paid weekly you give a weeks notice
monthly you give a mnth notice and one week for every year that you have worked there after .

As for the mangements failure to sort out a contract or review your employment status it puts both you and them in a bit of a limbo which you may be able to use to your advantage.

You would want to be carefull about who you give as a reference
as someone may ring up and get a file shifter who as they cant find a copy of your contract could say he didnt work here !!!

netman · 21-10-2002 12:15pm

reading through this made me think... i have a similar question, but i'm in a different situation. i've signed a contract and have gone past my probation period. i'm in the company nearly two years and can view the whole experience as a waste of time.

my biggest problem is that the notice period in my contract is 3 months, and whatever job i find if i mention that i need to give 3 months notice they just say thay can't wait that long.

i don't really know whom to ask, if i start asking around my company i'm afraid i'd get into trouble, as they're laying people off at the moment.

when i was starting off i though of it as a good thing, figuring if something happens and i lose my job i'll have three months to sort out another one, but now all i want is to leave.

does anyone know what would happen if i gave them a few weeks notice instead (above the minimum statutory) ? at this point i'm thinking even if i get sued it wouldn't be as bad since i'd be gone out of this hell.

seamus · 21-10-2002 1:01pm

In our place we've signed a contract that calls for a minimum of a month, but once someone quits, it's usually a week, cos that's all it takes to source a replacement. I'd assume many places are the same - you must stay for a month or until a replacement can be found, whichever is shorter. Best thing to do is ask co-workers or just observe what happens when someone else quits, or even better, ask someone who you may know who used to work with you.....

BuffyBot · 22-10-2002 1:48pm

Originally posted by seamus
In our place we've signed a contract that calls for a minimum of a month, but once someone quits, it's usually a week, cos that's all it takes to source a replacement. I'd assume many places are the same - you must stay for a month or until a replacement can be found, whichever is shorter. Best thing to do is ask co-workers or just observe what happens when someone else quits, or even better, ask someone who you may know who used to work with you.....

Hmmm, well (un)luckily mine is quite a specialised job. I've tendered a week, and they are now running round in a flap trying to find a replacement/give me a reason to stay. It's funny to watch if nothing else

Borzoi · 24-10-2002 11:25am

Originally posted by netman

my biggest problem is that the notice period in my contract is 3 months, and whatever job i find if i mention that i need to give 3 months notice they just say thay can't wait that long.

Really there is damn all a company can do should you decide to leave early, bear in mind you're entitled to have unused holidays included in your notice period.

The practical worst case is that they deny you a good reference, most companyies won't write a bad reference in case they get sued by the person later.

The other thing you can do is when you hand in your notice go back to your desk and do nothing, and keep doing nothing, most companies will then happily get you out of the office!

eth0_ · 24-10-2002 11:52am

If you're in a job more than 6 months you have to give 4 weeks notice.
Yes, there's nothing the company can do if you walk out, other than mention it on your reference, they're well entitled to say 'Johnny left his job without working the required notice period and made no further contact with us'.
Would that look good on a reference?

WhiteWashMan · 24-10-2002 11:59am

Originally posted by Borzoi
Really there is damn all a company can do should you decide to leave early, bear in mind you're entitled to have unused holidays included in your notice period.

they can sue you foir breach of contract if they want to.
and they would win.

you have to serve the notice period as agreed by you in your last contract.
the very least they will do is with hold you pay as you are effectively absent form work for the period of your notice if you leave early.
having said that, you can negotiate yourself something more reasonable, and if you have a good relationship you can usually discuss this with however is in charge.

or if they are laying off people try and get laid off. you may get a severence deal out of it as well!

eth0_ · 24-10-2002 3:50pm

Originally posted by WhiteWashMan
they can sue you foir breach of contract if they want to.
and they would win.

Why would they even bother going to the hassle? For most jobs, it would cost them more time and money to sue someone who downed tools and ran off, than to recruit someone in their place.

I reckon they'd be more likely to make it well known in your reference that you had left them in the lurch.

WhiteWashMan · 24-10-2002 3:55pm

Originally posted by eth0_
Why would they even bother going to the hassle? For most jobs, it would cost them more time and money to sue someone who downed tools and ran off, than to recruit someone in their place.

I reckon they'd be more likely to make it well known in your reference that you had left them in the lurch.

if you bothered to read what i had quoted, you will find that it was
quote:

Originally posted by Borzoi
Really there is damn all a company can do should you decide to leave early, bear in mind you're entitled to have unused holidays included in your notice period.

my reply was actually, yes, if they wanted, there is something they can do.
try to read everything before coming back with stupid replies please.

Borzoi · 25-10-2002 11:30am

Originally posted by WhiteWashMan
they can sue you foir breach of contract if they want to.
and they would win.

They can of course sue you, but whether or not they would win and what if any penalty would apply is a matter for the courts to decide, and fortunately not WWM

But in my opinion sueing is unlikey, there being little to gain fromit - unless you are that key employee that the company cannot survive without, but for most of us, that just doesn't apply.

Otherwise I'd agree with WWM, after you hand in notice, negotiate for the best pssible deal for yourself. The cleverer you are, the less options the company will have in dealing with you.

eth0_ · 25-10-2002 1:14pm

Originally posted by WhiteWashMan

my reply was actually, yes, if they wanted, there is something they can do.
try to read everything before coming back with stupid replies please.

I didn't dispute what you said. I said why would they bother in most cases.
Pedant.

WhiteWashMan · 27-10-2002 3:17pm

Originally posted by eth0_
I didn't dispute what you said. I said why would they bother in most cases.
Pedant.

yje question was asked, and the answer was given.

pedant, but that was what was asked.

now if you dont like it, go away and stop stalking me, or do Xerox not have enough work for you to do these days?

sure wont be long before you are looking for a new job anyway the way they are shedding jobs.

id suggest looking at some of the web sites in the sticky website links thread on the main work forum page

have a nice day my dear....

eth0_ · 28-10-2002 11:31am

Stalk? hahahah!
You're pathetic, making cheap jibes at someone's occupation just to feel you've gotten the upper hand, sad sad sad!

*yawn* let's see you get the last word in here then, go on, there's a good boy.

WhiteWashMan · 28-10-2002 11:52am

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

admit you were wrong.

djk1000 · 05-11-2002 12:34pm

Just for the record I am an employer/company owner, an employer cannot sue an employee for breach of employment contract. It's a fact to don't argue.
If you have worked in a company for less than 2 years you only have to give one weeks notice, or less than five years two weeks notice.

If an employer denies you a reference or makes you feel awkward about leaving or holds back any money you can take him to an employment tribuneral at absolutely no cost to you at all.

djk1000 · 05-11-2002 12:37pm

Bye the bye, if you are a contractor in the "self employed IT sector" sense of the word then you are not an employee and you can be sued because your contract is not an employment one. A good rule of thumb is if the company is paying your prsi then you are an employee.

WhiteWashMan · 05-11-2002 12:59pm

if you are a contractor, then you are likely to have your own early termination clause in the contract with penalties etc.

if you are wokring for a company you should have a contract that will have your terms and conditions in it for working notice periods.

just for the record, if you have someone who has a month notice and they dont work it, they are in breach of contract and you can sue them. simple as that.
sure, youre not going, but the question was asked what can they do, and thats what they can do.
the most liekly they will do is just not pay you for the time you took off.

but it depends on the nature of the job.

in my job we have people here who work anywhere between 3 and 6 months notice, and then they have another 3-6 months they cannot work for any company in direct competition to us or in any company that they were placed in when they worked for us. but then again, you are talking large money and high profile positions.

if you walk out of mcdonalds you are not going to get sued.
if you walk out of an MD position in a multinational, you could well do so.

so again, its up to you to negotiate at the start when you put your package together, or to come to some harmoneous conclusion that allows you your freedom whilst being beneficial to both parties at the end.

by the way, an employeer cant withhold a reference to your job or time at the comapny, they can however refuse to give personal feedback on you. in fact, if you get a bed reference, then you can sue them, so giving none is just as bad as it generally means you were not up to scratch.

Borzoi · 05-11-2002 1:50pm

Originally posted by WhiteWashMan
in my job we have people here who work anywhere between 3 and 6 months notice, and then they have another 3-6 months they cannot work for any company in direct competition to us or in any company that they were placed in when they worked for us. but then again, you are talking large money and high profile positions.

AFAIK (and I could be wrong) the legality of proscribing for future employment has not been tested here. The reason that this is dubious is that the emplyment contract ceases when the employee leaves a position, and so the prohibition on similar work would be of null value and unenforceable

I'd be interested to hear further, not that this applies to me, just curious.

djk1000 · 05-11-2002 2:00pm

WWM,

When I talked about a contractor getting sued, I was being general and not talking about employment solely. A contractor can be sued but an employer cannot sue an employee.
And I know what I am talking about when I say that an employee cannot be sued by a company for not working his/her notice. No one in this state is obligated to work under penalty. it is stated in the constitution (two exceptions being 1. the army cannot leave or strike, 2. the Gardai cannot strike).

But I seem to be rambeling on..........

In a nutshell employment law is on the employees side in Ireland. If you can give me one instance in the history of the state where an employee(MD or whatever) was successfully sued, I'll eat my hat.

P.S.
A "not to compete" clause where an employee cannot join a rival
is technically not part of an employment contract, that clause is its own contract and only becomes feasable after employment ends when the employment contract terminates. In that case a person is not an employee and can be sued.

WhiteWashMan · 05-11-2002 2:57pm

ok,
i thihnk we are on a common ground here with most things, the difference being i know more about english law than irish, being tha ti am in in england and there are technicalities between the two.

besides, im rushing out for a smoke

Victor · 05-11-2002 3:09pm

Originally posted by WhiteWashMan
if you walk out of an MD position in a multinational, you could well do so.

There are other circumstances - for example if you are an apprentice (in particular in senior professions), where the employer has invested in say lecture fees of the like. The contract is deemed by the courts to benefit the apprentice, not the employer. I am not aware of any cases like this in recent times.

Originally posted by Borzoi
AFAIK (and I could be wrong) the legality of proscribing for future employment has not been tested here. The reason that this is dubious is that the emplyment contract ceases when the employee leaves a position, and so the prohibition on similar work would be of null value and unenforceable

No, the law the quite clear in this respect, in particular where there is personal knowledge of the client by the employee and in particular services / professions apply here and trade secrets. ECI European Chemical Industries v Bell, where the company stopped the employee (a chemist with trade secrets), by injunction, from working for a competitor for 2 years. Also Arclex v McMurray, but see Oates v Romano, Mulligan v Corr, Coleborne v Kearns - the restriction must be reasonable in scope (geography, time, etc.) and may not be used to punish ex-employees or prevent commercial competition.

Originally posted by WhiteWashMan
the difference being i know more about english law than irish, being tha ti am in in england and there are technicalities between the two.

Both sets of employment law are quite similar because they are mostly based on Common Law and European Law.

Notice requirement

Comments