pay when a member of staff walks out?

stressed_mummy

we have just had a member of staff walk out with no notice!
we've even had a copy of the email they sent to some of our clients which has upset them

frankly i dont want to pay them anything BUT.... as they have quit in the middle of the month surely i shouldn't have to pay them a full months money.
i've had a look at the contract & it seems like they've broken it.
I'm sure some of you have some info/legal stuff on employment law as I want to do what is right

running your own business is sometimes not fun!!

TM1976

I can't see why you are obliged to pay them after they have finished work but you may owe them some holiday pay.

Personally I would withold the whole month's pay until they came and asked for it.

Horace

I would pay them for the days worked and if they are owed holiday pay then that too as you are obliged to pay them that. There is no need to pay them for a month because they havent worked the full month.

I think that I am right in thinking that you can actually discipline them because as far as you know they are absent without permission. If they have sent an email to clients that is considered rude then you could discipline them for gross misconduct.

If you are a member of the FSB - they have a free legal helpline (its worth being a member of the FSB just for that).

Also you can contact ACAS as they give free advice to employers as well as employees.

wuckfit

If I were you, I'd cease payment of wages from the moment that the employee left the premises. that might mean having to work out a pro-rata payment for the day in question.

But ensure you get sound legal advice. the (now ex-) employee may try to claim constructive dismissal in the meantime.

Savvy_Sue

You do need to pay them. Start by working out what they are due for this month, to date. Then work out what leave they are entitled to - when does your leave year start and end? If they've taken more leave than they've 'earned', you could deduct this if - and only if - you have a clause in your contract to say that you will do this. Otherwise it would be an unlawful deduction of wages.

However, you are not obliged to pay them any earlier than your normal payrun. And at that point you'll issue their P45.

Now, have you worked out what went wrong and how to avoid it happening again?

Mudd14

I agree with all of the above, they are entitled to pay for what they work, holiday but no more. The only waylegally is to take them to court for your fininacial lost that is directly linked with finding a replacement. Chances of you winning would be slim though.

We have a clause in our contracts that says 'If you leave without giving proper notice, the Company may deduct from any sums due to you an amount equivalent to the amount of notice you are required to give'

That way if someone leaves without giving 2 weeks notice you can deduct the equivalent of two weeks money.

Savvy_Sue

Is that legal Mudd? I didn't think you could NOT pay people for time they had actually worked.

Ours says something like "your leave entitlement is pro rata in your first and last years of employment." And then something about recovering any overpayment if you take too much in your last year, for example by taking 3 weeks leave in February and leaving in March, by which time you'd only have 'earned' 1/4 of your annual leave.

hippyadam

Mudd14 wrote: »

We have a clause in our contracts that says 'If you leave without giving proper notice, the Company may deduct from any sums due to you an amount equivalent to the amount of notice you are required to give'

That way if someone leaves without giving 2 weeks notice you can deduct the equivalent of two weeks money.

Blimey, and i thought i was hard nosed! :eek:
I doubt that's legal, but then i'm no brief so who knows... Wouldn't like to try and justify that clause in court though!

OP, pay up until they walked out, minus any overpaid holiday etc and no more. Your on shaky legal ground if you withhold wages for any time they have actually worked...

And as Savvy Sue said, have you looked at what went wrong and how to avoid it next time?

Mudd14

That comes straight from my employment law solicitor who is a qualified solicitor. She deals with all our employment 'stuff' and actually uses it in her own contracts.

Its more of a determent really to stop someone doing it.

pelirocco

hippyadam wrote: »

Blimey, and i thought i was hard nosed! :eek:
I doubt that's legal, but then i'm no brief so who knows... Wouldn't like to try and justify that clause in court though!

OP, pay up until they walked out, minus any overpaid holiday etc and no more. Your on shaky legal ground if you withhold wages for any time they have actually worked...

And as Savvy Sue said, have you looked at what went wrong and how to avoid it next time?

If their contract says they have to give notice , I am sure you can penalise them if they dont .....

Savvy_Sue

pelirocco wrote: »

If their contract says they have to give notice , I am sure you can penalise them if they dont .....

Not if the contract is itself unlawful. For example, a contract might say you're only entitled to 10 days holiday - that's unlawful if you're working a 5 day week. It might say you need to give 6 months' notice - that's unenforceable if not actually unlawful.

Actually I was thinking again about Mudd's clause:

Mudd14 wrote: »

We have a clause in our contracts that says 'If you leave without giving proper notice, the Company may deduct from any sums due to you an amount equivalent to the amount of notice you are required to give'

That way if someone leaves without giving 2 weeks notice you can deduct the equivalent of two weeks money.

My emphasis.

The amount of notice which is legally required, on both sides, is set out in law, and I believe is never more than a month although senior positions are often asked for more than that.

And I'm wondering if Mudd has ever tried to enforce that clause?

Because although you say it's a solicitor's wording, they're not always the best employers, and sometimes - how shall I phrase this? - try to rely on people thinking they're acting lawfully even if they're not.