Dismissed from work - what to say to prospective employers?

purplepardalis

Please do not mention the compromise agreement in an interview. Especially not in this climate.

You do not want anything to detract from your interview performance with regards to the skills/competency based side of it.
I recommend the sabbatical answer only if you actually do one. As I said, take the time to visit somewhere/do something you've been meaning or wanting to do.
And a good solicitor will tell you that the offer they have started with is unfair and will push for more. And should get it.
All the best, be kind to yourself and good luck whatever you decide

SarEl

Vader123 wrote: »

Again bad advice.

Any decnt interviewer will say "Oh, was it a fixed contract"

"No"

"So why did it end?"

"Er......"....


Game over.

Vader

I agree entirely. Employers (or at least most of them) are not stupid. If they smell a rat, even if they don't pursue the rat, you can be sure that they won't pursue you either! There is a lot of competition out there for jobs, and employers can afford to be very picky. There is no reason not to tell the truth, so why attempt subterfuge?

SarEl

purplepardalis wrote: »

Please do not mention the compromise agreement in an interview. Especially not in this climate.

I do not agree. The vast majority of my clients end up with compromise agreements or COT3's. Less than 25% go to tribunal. They get the same advice - tell the truth. The majority keep in touch at least until the have found new jobs. Invariably they get jobs quite quickly. Few employers are concerned about compromise agreements, and as I said before, the ones that are are generally more concerned that you will find something in their employment pracrices which do not come up to scratch - and they should know!

Sambucus_Nigra

purplepardalis wrote: »

Please do not mention the compromise agreement in an interview. Especially not in this climate.

You do not want anything to detract from your interview performance with regards to the skills/competency based side of it.
I recommend the sabbatical answer only if you actually do one. As I said, take the time to visit somewhere/do something you've been meaning or wanting to do.
And a good solicitor will tell you that the offer they have started with is unfair and will push for more. And should get it.
All the best, be kind to yourself and good luck whatever you decide

A sabbatical only works in certain areas; it would only take a few questions for someone lying about a sabbatical to reduce this answer to nothing....

OP - get a better deal and just tell the truth!

purplepardalis

SarEl wrote: »

I do not agree. The vast majority of my clients end up with compromise agreements or COT3's. Less than 25% go to tribunal. They get the same advice - tell the truth. The majority keep in touch at least until the have found new jobs. Invariably they get jobs quite quickly. Few employers are concerned about compromise agreements, and as I said before, the ones that are are generally more concerned that you will find something in their employment pracrices which do not come up to scratch - and they should know!

Well, mine isn't legal advice or based on statistics. It's advice based on both being someone who hires and also someone who is a job seeker - the 'experience' side of the coin perhaps!! :-)

SarEl

purplepardalis wrote: »

Well, mine isn't legal advice or based on statistics. It's advice based on both being someone who hires and also someone who is a job seeker - the 'experience' side of the coin perhaps!! :-)

I also hire people! But if you hire people - why would you have a problem with a potentail employee who fits the bill but says they have a compromise agreement with their previous employer? Because if you would hire them, then what is the problem with advice to tell the truth. And if you wouldn't, why wouldn't you?

purplepardalis

If I had 2 candidates that were equal in qualifications and experience and who I both felt would fit into the role then I have to say that the remainder of my judgement would be clouded by a compromise agreement being the reason for someone leaving, even though I know that firms often use them to get out of potential messy litigation. I also know that firms use them to get rid of a problem quicker than going through lengthy disciplinary processes. It's not fair to judge but it is realistic to expect that someone will.
I also know that in a CA you are not allowed to talk about it. As I do not know whether even mentioning it would breach this clause, I personally would err on the see of caution. That's not advice btw, that's just what I would do. In fact all of my advice regarding this is not meant to supersede anyone elses - it just comes from a personal opinion

SarEl

purplepardalis wrote: »

If I had 2 candidates that were equal in qualifications and experience and who I both felt would fit into the role then I have to say that the remainder of my judgement would be clouded by a compromise agreement being the reason for someone leaving, even though I know that firms often use them to get out of potential messy litigation. I also know that firms use them to get rid of a problem quicker than going through lengthy disciplinary processes. It's not fair to judge but it is realistic to expect that someone will.
I also know that in a CA you are not allowed to talk about it. As I do not know whether even mentioning it would breach this clause, I personally would err on the see of caution. That's not advice btw, that's just what I would do. In fact all of my advice regarding this is not meant to supersede anyone elses - it just comes from a personal opinion

I agree that any such advice - mine included - on this is opinion. And opinions will vary. I simply feel that employers will spot subterfuge because most people cannot lie very well, and if you have nothing to hide then there is no reason not to tell the truth. The gaging clauses do not prevent you from saying that an agreement exists - they prevent you from saying what is in the agreement and the circumstances which give rise to it.

Nor would I disagree that CA's can arise from other reasons, and maybe some people would judge. But any lengthy or messy disciplinary usually arises from an error on the part of the employer - often an error like not having any evidence! I would always question why an employer would give a CA when dismissal, if there are grounds, is really easy. Strangely for someone who spends most of their time representing employees, I am not as jaundiced by employers - even my clients who go to tribunal often obtain work before the case goes to court, because many employers, faced with "it was an unfair dismissal but I am fighting it at tribunal" actually don't even hold that against potential employees. It would appear that there are a lot of employers out there who are willing to trust their own judgement and confident of themselves. Or perhaps they are capable of spotting the truth when they see it. I don't know which. But it is surprising, even these days, how many people I see coming through my office get jobs relatively quickly.

RachelUK

Hello, I just wanted to post an update on my situation and thank everyone for the time they took to give advice.
I decided not to take my dispute with my ex employer any further, but my solicitor was able to negotiate a much better financial settlement for me, based on the unfair nature of the termination of my contract. She was also able to negotiate exactly what my ex employees can say in references provided to future employees.
I was offered a job within two weeks of looking - I am absolutely thrilled. They did ask why I was looking for a new job and I replied that there had been a change in the structure of my department and I was looking for a new challenge. The best part is that my new job will pay me a good amount more than my old one and has a better benefits package so even though I was completely heartbroken and stressed at the time, it looks like it was the best thing that could have happened!

mazinmouse

Congratulations - that is excellent news!