Compromise agreement or not ? 28 June 2014 at 7:20PM in Redundancy & redundancy planning 6 replies 1.8K views

madeinireland_2

Hi,

If someone has been off sick for some considerable time and they get offered a compromise agreement of 6 months pay to leave when they return to work - why would it be a good deal if they would normally get 6 months notice anyway.

I can only think that an agreed reference, getting the funds up front and no tax on the money are really the only benefits but....

Surely the person could stay with the company and string out any threat of performance management for a while and then just take their 6 months notice after finally getting dismissed. Also if they have been sick for 6 months then surely the company cannot provide a good reference as they would have to declare that if asked anyway ?

Thoughts ?

Thanks...

Takeaway_Addict

My thoughts are that you have hit the nail on the head with regards pros and cons of both. 6 months makes it sound like it's a high end job so would be alot harder to get a new job in the same area without a reference.

Ref the reference, you can make a reference sound good without lying, and you can legally give a bad one. If you come to an agreed reference you can get the to omit anything regarding sickness but it does mean if they refuse a question due to the CA then the potential employer might be suspicious but its as good as it will get.

What's your position exactly on this scenario?

madeinireland_2

It's a hypothetical situation as I'm trying to help a colleague who is currently off sick work out his best strategy.

I just know the company offers compromise agreements which at 6 months are less than the 9 months they offer on voluntary redundancy. The trouble is they don't offer the 9 months to those who have a performance problem and he was marked down before he went off sick as I think they are targeting the more highly paid people.

The guy is not fussed about getting a high end job when he goes - probably happy enough to stack shelves at the local supermarket as he is just a few years off retirement anyway - but I suppose a poor reference is not good even with that - but I figure he has blown his reference with the sick leave anyway so he may as well string out performance process when he gets back and take the 6 months notice rather than the 6 months CA.

Thanks.

Nebulous2

If action on the performance issues reaches a conclusion it could lead to dismissal without 6 months pay.

The company could give 6 months notice and insist that he works for that period, tying up his time for 6 months. Whereas taking the money would leave him free to move on to something else.

It's difficult to second-guess what people will do, particularly if we don't know them. However if they feel he is being deliberately obstructive they could certainly find a way to make things more awkward than you appear to expect.

Snakey

I agree with Nebulous. It's rare that you'll be in a position to walk in and say "look guys, this clearly isn't working, why don't you just pay me off and we'll part on good terms?" - you need direct access to the decision-makers, and it needs to be the best thing for them too. You usually hear about it happening at board level or a step or two below, with someone who they can't afford to have hanging around the place on bad terms (or slating them around the industry/profession) because they are so influential.

In my experience as a member of the rabble, it's far more likely that an employer will get you out on disciplinary issues if they think they can make it stick, and some bosses - the supervisory types who don't have the power to have you paid off or put on disciplinary - are not above making life so thoroughly unpleasant for you that you end up being glad to hand in your notice (and will then make you work every day of your notice just because). I doubt that your friend will feel like much of a winner after having put himself through 6-12 months of that treatment for eight hours a day, five days a week.

ohreally

Agree with the above pair. He could get kicked in the fullness of time and procedure, sick or not.

He needs to tread carefully.

Acc72

madeinireland wrote: »

It's a hypothetical situation as I'm trying to help a colleague who is currently off sick work out his best strategy.

I agree with the other comments and would also like to add - it depends on what the person actually wants.


This might sound obvious, but do not under-estimate the process that the person would have to go through in order to spin out a few extra months salary.


It can be a very negative, demotivating experience and it may not be in the persons best interests to drag out the situation, particularly if they have not been in the best of health.