Incorrect Notice Peroid

SavingSomeCoin

Hi All,

My colleague has been put 'At Risk' of redundancy, as their company is going through restructuring after a takeover by another company. Their contract indicates they are entitled to at least 1 month's written notice from the employer. On Friday 7th December, they had a meeting with a consultancy manager and presented with a notice of redundancy letter. The date for effective termination of their contract is Wednesday 2nd January.

By my calculations this is not a months notice. Can the employer not be taken to a tribuneral for wrongful dismissal?

Thanks,
SavingSomeCoin

Uncertain

SavingSomeCoin wrote: »

By my calculations this is not a months notice. Can the employer not be taken to a tribuneral for wrongful dismissal?

Thanks,
SavingSomeCoin

Indeed they can.

Technically notice begins the day after it is served. If this calculates as less than the contract requires then this would be a valid claim.

You don't say how long your colleague has been employed. He must be given (or paid in lieu) the greater of statutory notice (1 week for each year of service up to 12) or whatever his contract provides if this is more.

Holiday accrues right up to the end of the notice period so this must be paid as well.

SavingSomeCoin

Uncertain wrote: »

Indeed they can.

You don't say how long your colleague has been employed. He must be given (or paid in lieu) the greater of statutory notice (1 week for each year of service up to 12) or whatever his contract provides if this is more.

Hi Uncertain.

Thanlyou for the reply. They have been in employment for just over 6-7 months. So I am aware they are not entitled to normal statutory redundancy pay.

They have indicated to me that the company has offered to pay them a months pay (tax free) for the month of January on or shortly after Wednesday 2nd January. However, are they still not liable considering that one month's notice has not been served as per their contract?

SavingSomeCoin

getmore4less

If they are offering 1 month PILON forget any claim and take the money.

That buys out the right to notice and would probably be considered acceptable by an ET.

Even without PILON you should tell the employer they have given the wrong notice and give them a chance to correct it

Uncertain

getmore4less wrote: »

That buys out the right to notice and would probably be considered acceptable by an ET.

Even without PILON you should tell the employer they have given the wrong notice and give them a chance to correct it

Only if they pay the right amount!

As I understand the OP the contract specifies a month and they are only paying about three weeks.

My view would be to take the money then write claiming the rest.

If they refuse to pay then, based on what we are told here, there would be a straightforward claim for the extra few days pay.

Gentoo365

They are paying 1 month of extra pay. So it is (financially) equivalent as giving him notice of leaving at the end of February but he does not actually have to work the final month.

SarEl

So on neither site you posted to did you actually tell the entire truth in the first instance? He is being paid for three weeks AND a months pay. Good luck with wrongful dismissal claim. He'll need it. And as I told you previously, he will still have to raise it with the employer before making a claim - whereupon they are likely to consider him a greedy little wretch and pay him exactly one months notice and nothing more. He certainly wasn't entitled to anything more, and he still isn't after 7 months in the job.

Uncertain

Gentoo365 wrote: »

They are paying 1 month of extra pay. So it is (financially) equivalent as giving him notice of leaving at the end of February but he does not actually have to work the final month.

So why didn't you say that in the first post? So they are giving him, in total, more than is legally required!!!

It is a complete waste of everybody's time asking questions if you don't present the correct facts! :mad:

SarEl

Uncertain wrote: »

So why didn't you say that in the first post? So they are giving him, in total, more than is legally required!!!

It is a complete waste of everybody's time asking questions if you don't present the correct facts! :mad:

Because what you do is post it on multiple sites and see which answer you like best (mine was "you have to raise it with the employer before being able to make a claim" - which obviously wasn't the right answer). Then you respond only to the person /people whose answer you like best. because they might actually know the law, they might have correctly guessed what information you missed out, and following their advice might not get you sued for legal costs when you make that claim they advised you you had!

Not getting at you Uncertain - I agree entirely. It must have been obvious to the OP that their "friend" will be paid more than they were entitled to, and that that information was relevant. But that wouldn't have got the answer they wanted, now would it?

Gentoo365

Uncertain wrote: »

So why didn't you say that in the first post? So they are giving him, in total, more than is legally required!!!

It is a complete waste of everybody's time asking questions if you don't present the correct facts! :mad:

um, because the first post was not me and I was actually answering the question based on the information given.

McKneff

Gentoo365 wrote: »

um, because the first post was not me and I was actually answering the question based on the information given.

Ooops,

.......................