I'm curious about this. I was talking to a friend who said they were struggling at work because a colleague had resigned and was refusing to work their notice. This surprised me, I thought it would have been breach of contract. I know that a company can ask someone to go immediately (ie gardening leave) if for example they are moving to a business competitor, but I've never heard of an outright refusal to work notice by the employee. Obviously no one can be forced to come to work, but there must be some recourse for the company?
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Refusing to work notice
- Thread starter adc82140
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
birchesgreen
Established Member
What can they do? We are free people not slaves. All the company can do is not pay them. Lets face it, companys get rid of workers without recourse, so why not the other way around?
Some companies will demand back any money (they claim) was invested in the ex-employee such as training within a certain amount of time of the actual training. Most won't bother though.
Some companies will demand back any money (they claim) was invested in the ex-employee such as training within a certain amount of time of the actual training. Most won't bother though.
Bantamzen
Established Member
They will be able to take legal action against the former employee on the basis of breach of contract. However this isn't going to resolve your friend's issue as the process will be a long legal one. I all honestly the employer should first be concentrating on finding a suitable replacement for them, as there is no way to force them back to work.
The company must pay the employee for the work they have done (otherwise there could be issues with respect to the minimum wage). The company could sue for breach of contract but in reality it would achieve absolutely nothing.
You can still be sacked for gross misconduct during a notice period, which while it may not affect starting a job that has already been arranged, may result in issues further down the line if references are needed from the company they bailed from.
Normally when an employee wants to leave immediately it can be negotiated if done with good faith. No employer wants people hanging around solely because of notice periods - once a replacement has been appointed and work handed over it's in nobodies interest to have someone who's already signed off from the job turning up each day just to fill in a timesheet.
Normally when an employee wants to leave immediately it can be negotiated if done with good faith. No employer wants people hanging around solely because of notice periods - once a replacement has been appointed and work handed over it's in nobodies interest to have someone who's already signed off from the job turning up each day just to fill in a timesheet.
Falcon1200
Established Member
Unless there is some pressing reason for it, I'm not sure that refusing to work one's notice is a sensible idea, given that it shows a disregard for the welfare of both employer and fellow employees; Something a future potential employer might take into account, assuming they knew about it of course.
The worse alternative is if the employee went on a month's "sick leave" - you could end up paying him/her for that month and get nothing out of them.
dakta
Member
- Joined
- 18 Jun 2008
- Messages
- 577
This happens quite often, and yes it can be a breach of contract and as i understand it it is possible for a company to take legal action to recover losses due to this.
However the reality is it is rarely worth it. Places i used to work, warehouses etc often had people just stop showing and they'd just be replaced.
However the reality is it is rarely worth it. Places i used to work, warehouses etc often had people just stop showing and they'd just be replaced.
Perhaps your friend should be asking what would have happened if the same person had, say, been hit by a car, and was off work immediately for months.
They shouldn't be "struggling at work" because one person is missing, for whatever reason, as absences are part and parcel of the workplace and the employer needs to have processes in place to deal with it.
What would the company do if the friend also now, say, got flu and was off for two weeks?
They shouldn't be "struggling at work" because one person is missing, for whatever reason, as absences are part and parcel of the workplace and the employer needs to have processes in place to deal with it.
What would the company do if the friend also now, say, got flu and was off for two weeks?
I believe one of my former colleagues was signed off work by the doctor and immediately after lodging it, handed in their notice, packed up and left (this came at the start of the week after one of their departmental colleagues had left having finished working their notice)
This. There was a discussion at work about this a while back when resource was pared to the bone (during furlough I think) - staff can operate for a short time at 100%+ capacity, but beyond that, productivity is just going to go through the floor
That would surely be filed under "sh*t happens" and jobs would be cancelled. Customers would be far more understanding of a job cancellation due to sickness than they would be if it's due to a staff member deciding that contract law doesn't apply to them. The former doesn't reflect badly on the business, the latter does.
dakta
Member
- Joined
- 18 Jun 2008
- Messages
- 577
I suppose whilst legally contract law applies to them, from a pure effect point of view it likely doesn't because it's so not worth chasing, I'd expect you have to be a big player to be worth what it would cost to persue.
dakta
Member
- Joined
- 18 Jun 2008
- Messages
- 577
It's not the same thing, but it reminds me somewhat of the restrictive covenants you sometimes find in contracts especially for professional grades - whilst if written properly they can be enforced, they are often unenforceable and again, often more hassle than it's worth in a lot of real world scenarios.
The unknown here is if the employee gave their notice simply because they had found or been offered another job with pressure to start immediately or if it followed some situation created by the employing company or a specific employee of their current employer but not formally a breach of their contract. In theory no difference but in reality the latter 'muddies the water'.
As I understand if no breach of contract the employee still legally has to work their notice. Within the contact of employment accepted by the employee the consequences of not working notice should be stated. Beyond not paying the employee for the days not worked the employer at least in theory may be able to claim for their losses e.g. the employee was paid £20/hour and a contractor was brought in at £30/hour for the basic hours the employee should have worked the employer can claim £10/hour from the employee. The same could apply if other employees worked overtime at £30/hour.
If it is the employer who gives notice again as I understand the employee is expected to work their notice period or at least be paid for it but given 'gardening leave'. One reason for the employer doing this is so the employee can not collate information that may be useful to them not least should they in future be employed by a competitor or in any way sabotage anything. While of course the former will be covered within the contract of employment and if found out the employee could be taken to court the safe option for the employer is to immediately escort the employee off the premises.
As I understand if no breach of contract the employee still legally has to work their notice. Within the contact of employment accepted by the employee the consequences of not working notice should be stated. Beyond not paying the employee for the days not worked the employer at least in theory may be able to claim for their losses e.g. the employee was paid £20/hour and a contractor was brought in at £30/hour for the basic hours the employee should have worked the employer can claim £10/hour from the employee. The same could apply if other employees worked overtime at £30/hour.
If it is the employer who gives notice again as I understand the employee is expected to work their notice period or at least be paid for it but given 'gardening leave'. One reason for the employer doing this is so the employee can not collate information that may be useful to them not least should they in future be employed by a competitor or in any way sabotage anything. While of course the former will be covered within the contract of employment and if found out the employee could be taken to court the safe option for the employer is to immediately escort the employee off the premises.
They can’t take up their new post in that period then can they? Claiming statutory sick pay from one employer while receiving pay for work from another is fraud isn’t it?
Maybe that’s just for the NHS though?
Nym
Established Member
No offence intended to those who we care about. But...
Employers pull this kind of stuff all the time, zero hours contracts, changes to terms, unpaid expected overtime (especially for low paid salaried workers) etc etc.
I've known union advice for employees in toxic environments be, "Resign with immediate effect, don't give them any notice."
Not coming in for notice without telling them is one thing, this advice was to just tell them they're not getting any.
Employers pull this kind of stuff all the time, zero hours contracts, changes to terms, unpaid expected overtime (especially for low paid salaried workers) etc etc.
I've known union advice for employees in toxic environments be, "Resign with immediate effect, don't give them any notice."
Not coming in for notice without telling them is one thing, this advice was to just tell them they're not getting any.
Iskra
Established Member
More information is needed here. Did they refuse to work any of their notice, did they say they would only work some of their notice, did they simply walk off shift or not turn up at all, was the resignation accepted and what was the notice given within it?
Technically, depending on the circumstances, this person could be dismissed but it does seem pointless pursuing that option for someone who isn’t bothered. Although in some extreme circumstances that can be necessary and justified.
Obviously, leaving under a cloud is never a particularly great thing, but if the person has got another job that’s wanting them to start sooner than their notice expires then it’s a position one can empathise with. Even more so if the former employer wasn’t the best. Generally speaking ‘burning bridges’ isn’t recommended, but it can focus ones mind on making their new position a success.
Technically, depending on the circumstances, this person could be dismissed but it does seem pointless pursuing that option for someone who isn’t bothered. Although in some extreme circumstances that can be necessary and justified.
Obviously, leaving under a cloud is never a particularly great thing, but if the person has got another job that’s wanting them to start sooner than their notice expires then it’s a position one can empathise with. Even more so if the former employer wasn’t the best. Generally speaking ‘burning bridges’ isn’t recommended, but it can focus ones mind on making their new position a success.
Snow1964
Established Member
Zero hours is bit irrelevant where the employee has a contractual notice period, and then chooses to breach the contract they have signed.
Zero hours contracts are more like spot hire contracts, might use same person regularly but neither side has any obligation to agree to future period of use.
As for toxic, resign immediately, that is where there is already a breach (eg harassment, unfair treatment etc) and following up for loss of earnings is likely
I've put some more questions to my friend about this...
The employee refused to work any notice. Resigned by email the day before a shift. To give a bit more detail without breaking confidences, this wasn't a low paid casual job, but a professional grade that requires registration with a professional body. The resignation was accepted subject to the terms of the contract (1 month notice period), but the employee has since then declined to answer any further correspondence, other than to say they are not coming back. There had been no indication that the employee was unhappy at work, they hadn't approached their manager (or indeed their union according to their rep) to air any concerns.
I suspect they have been offered a better job subject to an immediate start.
This really is about a friend and not me in case anyone is wondering. I work for the NHS where contracts are rigorously enforced (hence my lack of understanding of the nuances here), this case is about a completely different industry.
The employee refused to work any notice. Resigned by email the day before a shift. To give a bit more detail without breaking confidences, this wasn't a low paid casual job, but a professional grade that requires registration with a professional body. The resignation was accepted subject to the terms of the contract (1 month notice period), but the employee has since then declined to answer any further correspondence, other than to say they are not coming back. There had been no indication that the employee was unhappy at work, they hadn't approached their manager (or indeed their union according to their rep) to air any concerns.
I suspect they have been offered a better job subject to an immediate start.
This really is about a friend and not me in case anyone is wondering. I work for the NHS where contracts are rigorously enforced (hence my lack of understanding of the nuances here), this case is about a completely different industry.
Last edited:
I hear you.
However, my point was more that no-one should be “struggling at work” because one person disappears suddenly. Struggling at work is different to “I took on a couple of extra jobs to help out”.
At the end of the day it’s self-evident the employee won’t be coming back, so the solution is not to pursue them but to sort out things so they work, whether it is by re-allocating tasks, postponing what can be postponed, and, above all, finding a replacement either temporarily or in the longer term.
It is not your friend’s responsibility to solve this and certainly not to the point of “struggling at work“ rather than sticking their hand up to muck in when they have a spare hour or two.
I am intending on retiring next year and was advised by my manager that it is three months notice. How they enforce it shows how highly they think of you. There was a conversation between HR and someone who had resigned which went. What about serving the notice period. We are not concerned about that. What about untaken leave. We will pay you off for that. Just leave the premises immediately.
On the other hand there is a part time member of staff who is in their early 70's and had done a similar job for years with previous employers. The only way he will leave is feet first.
On the other hand there is a part time member of staff who is in their early 70's and had done a similar job for years with previous employers. The only way he will leave is feet first.
Did I say anything about the NHS?
In fact the NHS works effectively as one body, and such a fraud could not be carried out. Current and future employers can discuss a mutually acceptable starting date which can be anywhere between 0 days and the full notice period. I think there is some recognition that when someone is appointed to a new job , their interest in their old job starts to diminish, and aaless than full notice period can be agreed to suit all parties.
Last edited:
My experience was that both my major employers were dreadful at "succession planning" and the second one had such a bad recruitment process that most people put their head in the sand and didn't think about it.
I resigned from both of them and served my notice, in the second case I gave more notice than my contract required and said something like "I'll leave on 5 April next year" and that was accepted. In my first job I was in an industry with "proprietary secrets" so could have been asked to leave immediately, but sadly I wasn't, but I had lined up my next job taking this probability into account.
I once had someone for whom I was line manager and he resigned, but then came to me to say something like "I'd like to start my new job on 6 February, but I didn't give you my notice in time". My response was along the lines of "I distinctly remember your saying you were leaving a week before that date, and that's what I'll put on the forms I have to complete. If anyone questions this to you, send them to me". He left and started his new job as he wanted to, there were no issues.
I was able to plan on serving my notice both times. I know companies and junior management panic when someone gives their notice because they haven't previously properly considered the possibility. Employees are pawns to be moved around at the will of the employer, and the idea that they have independent thought, plans and options doesn't occur to the employer.
I resigned from both of them and served my notice, in the second case I gave more notice than my contract required and said something like "I'll leave on 5 April next year" and that was accepted. In my first job I was in an industry with "proprietary secrets" so could have been asked to leave immediately, but sadly I wasn't, but I had lined up my next job taking this probability into account.
I once had someone for whom I was line manager and he resigned, but then came to me to say something like "I'd like to start my new job on 6 February, but I didn't give you my notice in time". My response was along the lines of "I distinctly remember your saying you were leaving a week before that date, and that's what I'll put on the forms I have to complete. If anyone questions this to you, send them to me". He left and started his new job as he wanted to, there were no issues.
I was able to plan on serving my notice both times. I know companies and junior management panic when someone gives their notice because they haven't previously properly considered the possibility. Employees are pawns to be moved around at the will of the employer, and the idea that they have independent thought, plans and options doesn't occur to the employer.
The company could claim for costs incurred as a result of breach of contract, but very unlikely to happen in reality.
Costs could include:
Agency costs to get someone in at agency rates,
Losses incurred to revenue
By the sounds of it this company are relying on other existing staff to do that persons job so no extra costs incurred to recover anyway
Costs could include:
Agency costs to get someone in at agency rates,
Losses incurred to revenue
By the sounds of it this company are relying on other existing staff to do that persons job so no extra costs incurred to recover anyway
75A
Established Member
My story is a bit bizare, Aged 58 I was suspended on full pay pending a disciplinary hearing, during which time I resigned, it worked out I was paid for another 6 weeks which was fine by me.
After that I was getting the company pension and had the 6 figure 'lump sum' I was expecting.
Then after another 4 or so months I found a 5 figure sum in my bank account when I queried it I was told it was 3 months pay which was tax free, in lieu of notice! I told you it was bizarre.
After that I was getting the company pension and had the 6 figure 'lump sum' I was expecting.
Then after another 4 or so months I found a 5 figure sum in my bank account when I queried it I was told it was 3 months pay which was tax free, in lieu of notice! I told you it was bizarre.
Last edited:
If the relationship between employee and employer has broken down that badly, I'd say it's better for both parties if the notice isn't worked. In that context it would be defensible for the employee to state their resignation is with immediate effect, notwithstanding their notice clause. But that's a specific set of circumstances.
- Status