Notice period query

nightsky224

I am currently querying my notice period with current employer - I am not leaving but they are changing HR systems and my notice period has been put in as 7 weeks rather than the 1 month I expected it to be. I have been there for 7 years and per the contract below I have always interpreted it to say I need to give them 1 months notice but they would need to give me 1 month plus one additional week for each complete year of such employment between four and twelve years.

I would be interested to see how others interpret it?

13      Termination

           You may terminate this contract by giving 1 months notice in writing.  You are entitled to receive notice in writing to terminate your employment, except in cases where XYZ Company is entitled to dismiss you summarily, as follows:

(a)      one week during the probationary period

(b)          one month for continuous employment with XYZ Company of up to four years.

(c)      one additional week for each complete year of such employment between four and twelve years.

(d)      12 weeks for employment of 12 years or more.

XYZ Company also reserves the right to make a payment in lieu of all or any part of your period of notice.

XYZ Company reserves the right to ask you not to attend work, or require you to perform different duties or special projects during any period of suspension or notice.

The normal retirement age is 65 and your employment will terminate automatically on your 65th birthday, without any requirement for XYZ Company to serve notice      

Undervalued

You are correct.

The (currently) seven weeks they have to give you is the statutory minimum if the employer is giving the employee notice. The law requires 1 week per year of service up to a maximum of 12. A contract can require more notice but not less.

But for your contract you would only have to give them one week's notice to leave, regardless of how long you had been employed. However you have agreed to a contract that requires you to give a month's notice, so that it what you must do.

There is no legal requirement for notice periods to be equal either way.

nightsky224

Undervalued said:

You are correct.

The (currently) seven weeks they have to give you is the statutory minimum if the employer is giving the employee notice. The law requires 1 week per year of service up to a maximum of 12. A contract can require more notice but not less.

But for your contract you would only have to give them one week's notice to leave, regardless of how long you had been employed. However you have agreed to a contract that requires you to give a month's notice, so that it what you must do.

There is no legal requirement for notice periods to be equal either way.

Thanks that's really helpful, I am pushing back on it so I am hoping they will respond well.

Sandtree

Undervalued said:

There is no legal requirement for notice periods to be equal either way.

Doesnt unfair contract term legislation apply to contracts of employment?

My understanding, which I admit could be wrong, doesnt technically require them to be the same however could fall foul of unfair term rules if the employer (as the one with power in the relationship) only had to give the statutory minimum but the employee (as the weaker party in the relationship) had to give 9 months notice in all circumstances?

Obviously a theoretical question given in this case the employee has the shorter notice period and so not disadvantaged by the contract.

General_Grant

Sandtree said:

Undervalued said:

There is no legal requirement for notice periods to be equal either way.

Doesnt unfair contract term legislation apply to contracts of employment?

My understanding, which I admit could be wrong, doesnt technically require them to be the same however could fall foul of unfair term rules if the employer (as the one with power in the relationship) only had to give the statutory minimum but the employee (as the weaker party in the relationship) had to give 9 months notice in all circumstances?

Obviously a theoretical question given in this case the employee has the shorter notice period and so not disadvantaged by the contract.

Unequal notice periods would not be considered "unfair" legally.
And you have noticed that they are generally unequal by statute once an employee has been working for an organisation for some time because of the increasing notice required to be given to an employee (up to the 12 weeks mark).

General_Grant

nightsky224 said:

. . .   

The normal retirement age is 65 and your employment will terminate automatically on your 65th birthday, without any requirement for XYZ Company to serve notice      

It may not be of interest to you right now but I was struck by this final sentence.  Is this not age discrimination and not lawful?

Savvy_Sue

I think you're right, that looks like an old clause which should now be removed.