better to leave with immediate effect?

missjy

I made redundant in December. Prior to being made redundant I applied for numerous jobs and had two interviews. Job 1 said that the decision had been very difficult and I had missed out by a margin. Got offered Job 2, which I started on 5th December.

Job 1 has now rang me and said that the person they offered the job to cannot take it because of a job offer elsewhere - and therefore as the next candidate they would like to offer me the job. I have accepted the offer and they have taken my references from my previous employers from which I was made redundant and are happy with them. They say that they would like be to start as soon as I can give them a start date.

Job 2 is in a college so I have only technically been at work for two weeks, and done very little except being told to go have a 'coffee break' every hour just to get us out of the way!

They advertised 15 posts and 7 of us have started and 8 are due to start in the next few weeks. They said that they had hundreds of applications and on the interview day there were 40 applicants there.

We have no received a written contract of employment. I asked HR who said that one month's notice was required. However I feel that it would be better for all concerned that if I left with immediate effect. This way they can call in one of the other people they interviewed and get them to start with all the other new staff next week. Also the nature of the job means that if I carried on working there for another month and then left it would be harder for the new person to catch up and also disruptive for the students for a new face to suddenly appear and go back to step one with.

Would it be unfair of me to resign on Friday with immediate effect? I do not mind if they want me to pay back my salary for the two weeks holiday period. I don't want to lose Job 1 because Job 2 wants me to work 1 months notice period What would be the consequences of me resigning with immediate effect?

getmore4less

I don't think you will loose the job even if you did do 1 month notice,
they allready have had problems with candidate No.1.

leaving imediately is one thing they could become concerned about, they don't want you doing it to them, they know you will have notice.

You have worked more than a month now.

highly likely the contractual 1 month is correct.

Talk to the key person, not happy, job not what expected, got another job, will be leaving, happy to go immedieately by mutual agreement and happy for any ajustments for overtaken holiday pay etc.

If negotiations fail then consider leaving immediately.

Unlikely they could claim much for losses so not worth their effort when they could just get someone else in.

WhiteHorse

The information given regarding Job 2 suggests that it is an insecure post with a high staff turnover. That in turn suggests that they would get rid of you at a moments notice if it suits them.

An easy decision.

DVardysShadow

getmore4less wrote: »

highly likely the contractual 1 month is correct.

Basically, I agree. But http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/RedundancyAndLeavingYourJob/Resigningorretiring/DG_175837 says:

If you have worked for your employer for one month or more, the legal minimum amount of notice you must give is one week.
Normally your employment contract will set out a longer notice period. If it does, you should give this length of notice to your employer.

Now, I would suggest OP looks through all material received so far, to see if the month is specified. And if it is not, just give a weeks notice, arguing that contract particulars have not been supplied. But, OP, do get your offer in writing first!