We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

breach of compromise agreement by employer.

1…3738404243…72

Comments

  • Milkshock
    Milkshock Posts: 402 Forumite
    edited 12 September 2011 at 5:51PM
    mildred1978 wrote: »
    So in 10 years time, when the current staff have gone, you think their replacements will read the words WHICH FORM THE LEGAL CONTRACT in the way you do, do you?

    quite honestly in 10 years time, when the current staff have gone i wont have any problems anyway!

    clearly the organisation are going to issue me with a letter of assurance, which is as good as a CA anyway.
  • Milkshock
    Milkshock Posts: 402 Forumite
    mildred1978 wrote: »
    Which was provided. Your CA AS LEGALLY WORDED doesn't prevent them from answering follow up questions. And you can't now add that retrospectively.

    So LEGALLY, they did nothing wrong!

    that was debateable in the first place

    and not debateable now.
  • mildred1978
    mildred1978 Posts: 3,367 Forumite
    Milkshock wrote: »
    that was debateable in the first place

    and not debateable now.

    :wall::wall::wall::wall::wall:

    Did it hurt when the horse kicked you?
    Science adjusts its views based on what's observed.
    Faith is the denial of observation, so that belief can be preserved.
    :A Tim Minchin :A
  • harz99
    harz99 Posts: 3,756 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Home Insurance Hacker!
    Milkshock wrote: »
    quite honestly in 10 years time, when the current staff have gone i wont have any problems anyway!

    clearly the organisation are going to issue me with a letter of assurance, which is as good as a CA anyway.

    IMHO, in ten years time if you haven't changed your mindset and moved on (or dissappeared to Troll heaven) you will still be unemployed.:rotfl:
  • Milkshock
    Milkshock Posts: 402 Forumite
    harz99 wrote: »
    IMHO, in ten years time if you haven't changed your mindset and moved on (or dissappeared to Troll heaven) you will still be unemployed.:rotfl:

    fine then the state can pick up the pieces and you as a taxpayer will have to pay to keep me out of work.
  • harz99
    harz99 Posts: 3,756 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Home Insurance Hacker!
    Milkshock wrote: »
    fine then the state can pick up the pieces and you as a taxpayer will have to pay to keep me out of work.

    Sorry to dissappoint you but my affairs are organised so that I don't pay tax.:rotfl:
  • Milkshock
    Milkshock Posts: 402 Forumite
    harz99 wrote: »
    Sorry to dissappoint you but my affairs are organised so that I don't pay tax.:rotfl:

    good then.
  • ILW
    ILW Posts: 18,333 Forumite
    harz99 wrote: »
    Sorry to dissappoint you but my affairs are organised so that I don't pay tax.:rotfl:

    Irish Traveller?
  • harz99
    harz99 Posts: 3,756 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Home Insurance Hacker!
    ILW wrote: »
    Irish Traveller?

    Close.......................
  • Milkshock
    Milkshock Posts: 402 Forumite
    edited 13 September 2011 at 11:23AM
    Pete111 wrote: »
    Oooooooo loving this Bad Apple tag. :cool:

    Get real Hiccups. Of course it's vital to abide by employment law.....Just as it's vital to know when to take a calculated risk by bending it when commercial reality rears it's ugly head.

    (Bad to the bone.....Bbbbbbbbad....Bad to the bone...:rotfl:)

    i think the point is a lot of actions managers and employers take are not done in an 'above board' manner. if they were so confident about their actions why not make them officially known rather than conduct whispering campaigns or other underhand tactics IF there is no prospect of any damage being done to their reputation?

    of course the point is there IS a risk to themselves in law or even simply to their own jobs, and they dont want to be seen to be the ones left holding the gun.

    all to often ive seen hr people assist them in making sure they can get away with whatever it is they want to.
This discussion has been closed.
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.2K Spending & Discounts
  • 245K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.4K Life & Family
  • 258.8K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.
Update Your Picture