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!
Can they do this?
mickyrod
Posts: 48 Forumite
The company that my daughter works for has just been taken over. The new company are asking her to sign a new contract (not even sure if this is required under TUPE).
However, one of the items in the new contract states that her employment will automatically terminate when she reaches the state retirement age. Can they do this?
:mad:
However, one of the items in the new contract states that her employment will automatically terminate when she reaches the state retirement age. Can they do this?
:mad:
0
Comments
-
Employers can no longer require employees to retire simply upon reaching state retirement age so such a clause would be unenforceable.0
-
it just sounds like they haven't updated the contract, as Jarndyce as put the claus is now unenforceable...The Googlewhacker referance is to Dave Gorman and not to my opinion of the search engine!
If I give you advice it is only a view and always always take professional advice before acting!!!
4 people on the ignore list....Bliss!0 -
Study the new contract though - when people ask you to change/update a contract it is rarely for your benefit. For instance I knew a guy who declined a new contract when the rail company he worked for was taken over - as one of the benefits he lost was free first class transport across the whole network (not just his 'bit').0
-
They have updated the contract, as before the current wording it said you must leave th ecompany when you reach 60 years for a woman and 65 for a man. This was pointed out as wrong, but all they have done is change it to say state retirement age!
They also have a statement that says instant dismissal should you become unsound of mind or become a patient within the meaning of the mental health act 1959. That can't be right can it?0 -
Dear Lord, this employer is still living in the 1950s - any employee dismissed merely because of their age would be unfairly dismissed. As would be the case for an employer issuing the 'instant dismissal' of an employee they decide has 'become unsound of mind'."You were only supposed to blow the bl**dy doors off!!"0
-
They have updated the contract, as before the current wording it said you must leave th ecompany when you reach 60 years for a woman and 65 for a man. This was pointed out as wrong, but all they have done is change it to say state retirement age!
They also have a statement that says instant dismissal should you become unsound of mind or become a patient within the meaning of the mental health act 1959. That can't be right can it?
Then they are idiots...
Ultimately even if she signs it I would very much doubt its enforceable and if they dismissed her for having mental health problems then there would be a good chance that she would win a tribunal.
I am all for sticking up for employers but this one sounds ridiculous.The Googlewhacker referance is to Dave Gorman and not to my opinion of the search engine!
If I give you advice it is only a view and always always take professional advice before acting!!!
4 people on the ignore list....Bliss!0 -
good god who is this employer???All of my views are my own
0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.7K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.4K Spending & Discounts
- 245.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.6K Life & Family
- 259.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards