When to resign?

LouisaMay_3

I am looking to leave my current employment at the end of June (3 months). My current contract says I only have to give one month's notice, but I would prefer to give my employer more than that if possible. This is mostly because of my colleagues - we get on well and I don't want to drop them in it and 3 months would give my employer time to replace me so that my colleagues won't have to pick up my workload. So what I want to know is - if I offer my resignation now can they make me leave after one month (my official minimum notification period)? Or is there anything else they can do (other than refuse annual leave, which I don't intend to take anyway)?

ditzyat50

Personally I would keep it professional and stick to the one month notice. Check your contract because one month notice probably works both ways so employer could tell you to leave in one month.

heretolearn_2

I would stick to the one month.

You never know how your employer will react to the news. I've known even 'nice' employers be vile to people who are leaving and you don't want 3 months of that. Likewise colleagues can be a bit funny too.

And if they recruit someone soon, they won't want both of you, so they might get rid of you earlier than you wanted.

jfh7gwa

There is no benefit to you to give more than the minimum notice. Short of wanting to be "nice", there is so much potential here for your employer to let you go with the month's notice, and you'd have absolutely no comeback.

The main one I think has already been mentioning (timing - wanting to get rid of you after training someone up, perhaps 1 month after you say you're leaving i.e. 2 months earlier than you'd planned).

Unless there is a very significant business reason to give them more than 1 month's notice, be professional and stick to the terms of your contract.

If your employer was struggling for work, etc etc and had to let you go, they wouldn't hesitate to give you one month's notice, even if your direct manager had sympathy with you. There's a difference between being as nice as you can, but still sticking within the limits of looking out for yourself.

LouisaMay wrote: »

I don't want to drop them in it and 3 months would give my employer time to replace me so that my colleagues won't have to pick up my workload

You've confused your responsibilities here. This isn't your problem to solve or mitigate against.

If there's a problem with handing over your workload, your employer needs to look at their staff exit process, training and capacity management, maybe even writing up a 3 month notice period in future employee contracts. If you think your current colleagues will have a rough time, don't mask your management's lack of management by giving them three times as much notice as you're required to.

Especially for no benefit to yourself.

tehone

If your employer (thought they) needed 3 months notice to replace you, then your notice period would have been 3 months.

I'd just stick to the 1 month that you are required to give - if you require any holiday within this month book it first before giving notice.

Evilm

You should stick to the month. The rest isn't your problem.

ditzyat50

tehone wrote: »

I'd just stick to the 1 month that you are required to give - if you require any holiday within this month book it first before giving notice.

This is very sound advice about booking any holiday due .:)

k12479

tehone wrote: »

I'd just stick to the 1 month that you are required to give - if you require any holiday within this month book it first before giving notice.

Shouldn't this be 'use your holiday allowance before giving notice'? Otherwise your booked hols can still be cancelled, I think.

DCFC79

The employer finding a replacement isn't your concern, dont feel obliged to give 3 months notice. Im sure they could manage whilst they find a replacement.

getmore4less

What's the employers notice(min is 1 week per year service), thats an option if it is longer than 1 month, that way you don't risk geting asked to leave early.