Notice period question? What if you leave early?

whitegoods_engineer

Thanks Paulineb. I agree that it seems ridiculous to expect an ex-employee who had left ahead of notice period, going to a disciplinary meeting for the prospect of getting the sack for leaving early. The employee has already gone to the new job so what would be the point?

As for suing the ex employee for the costs in providing a replacement worker to cover the absence during the notice period, again, this seems unlikely in most cases.

I conclude that in this case, the ex employee is free to leave regardless of the length of notice stipulated in the contract. There appears to be nothing the employer can do to prevent the employee leaving before the end of the notice period.

paddedjohn

The employee in question just better hope they don't need a good reference of this employer in the future. If they are out of pocket due to the ex-employee leaving early and they have been left in the cr4p then they may indeed sue just to get their own back.

ValHaller

gibson123 wrote: »

Not necessarily - An employment contract in its simplest form is

You come to work - I pay you

You refuse to come to work you are in breach of contract which is Gross Misconduct which means you are sacked. It would be pretty cut and dried IMO.

That is exactly why you have some process. You are assuming. Suppose OP has been hospitalised in a RTA and is in a coma. That is not Gross Misconduct.

zzzLazyDaisy

gibson123 wrote: »

Not necessarily - An employment contract in its simplest form is

You come to work - I pay you

You refuse to come to work you are in breach of contract which is Gross Misconduct which means you are sacked. It would be pretty cut and dried IMO.

I sincerely hope that you are not an employer.

If you dismiss an employee without following proper procedures as set down in the ACAS code of practice, the dismissal would be unfair, regardless of the fact that you may believe you had a fair reason for dismissal.

It is also the case that many dismissals have an element of discrimination which would have come to light, had the employer followed proper procedures but chose not to do so, (often because the employee 'has no rights within the first two years'). The qualifying period does not apply to discriminatory dismissals, and the fact that the employer would have known about the situation had they made proper enquiries, but chose not to, means that they are deemed to have knowledge of the discriminatory factor.

ohreally

gibson123 wrote: »

You refuse to come to work you are in breach of contract which is Gross Misconduct which means you are sacked. It would be pretty cut and dried IMO.

Wow.

Oh, there is little cut and dried about it.

pinkshoes

whitegoods_engineer wrote: »

I conclude that in this case, the ex employee is free to leave regardless of the length of notice stipulated in the contract. There appears to be nothing the employer can do to prevent the employee leaving before the end of the notice period.

You are right, there is absolutely NOTHING the employer can do to force them to physically stay.

However, if it leaves them unable to get work done, then they can employ a temp to cover until the end of the official notice period.

I had to work my full 1 month notice period as a design engineer, as otherwise it would be £30/hour for a contractor they could deduct, as that's the going rate for someone of the same experience!

ohreally

pinkshoes wrote: »

I had to work my full 1 month notice period as a design engineer, as otherwise it would be £30/hour for a contractor they could deduct, as that's the going rate for someone of the same experience!

Best they may be able to recover would be differential costs between rate to employ you and the contractor.

Bamber19

ohreally wrote: »

Best they may be able to recover would be differential costs between rate to employ you and the contractor.

It's splitting hairs though, either they're still paying you your notice as they are obliged to do and the additional cost to them is the entire wage of the contractor, or they're not paying you and the cost to them is the difference between what you would have earned and what the contractor earned, you end up down the same amount through either a straight bill or a mix of lost earnings and a bill.

anamenottaken

Bamber19 wrote: »

It's splitting hairs though, either they're still paying you your notice as they are obliged to do and the additional cost to them is the entire wage of the contractor, or they're not paying you and the cost to them is the difference between what you would have earned and what the contractor earned, you end up down the same amount through either a straight bill or a mix of lost earnings and a bill.

Don't see how ohreally was splitting hairs. Ohreally was responding to someone who appeared to say they (the departing employee) would have been charged the full cost of the temporrary contractor if they had not worked their full notice and wouldn't have received their notice pay because they wouldn't have worked it.

Even if they had received pay for the unworked notice, that would have been subject to tax and NI whereas the £30/hour for the replacement would have been the gross amount.

In fact, the employee having broken the contract by not working, the employer would not have to pay salary for the notice period - it wouldn't have been the employer giving notice.

Bamber19

anamenottaken wrote: »

Don't see how ohreally was splitting hairs. Ohreally was responding to someone who appeared to say they (the departing employee) would have been charged the full cost of the temporrary contractor if they had not worked their full notice and wouldn't have received their notice pay because they wouldn't have worked it.

Even if they had received pay for the unworked notice, that would have been subject to tax and NI whereas the £30/hour for the replacement would have been the gross amount.

In fact, the employee having broken the contract by not working, the employer would not have to pay salary for the notice period - it wouldn't have been the employer giving notice.

The point is that ultimately you end up paying the contractors full wage because either you still get paid and are billed for their full wage or you don't get paid and are billed for the additional costs of employing the contractor. The loss to you is the same either way and whichever way you arrive at that loss is not really relevant.