Payment for work

twpoc

Hi all,

This is my first post on Boards.ie and I'm looking for some advice.

I started a new job a couple of weeks ago that was found through a recruiter and signed a contract with the company in question. However, after working there for 3 days I decided that the situation was working environment was desperate and I left (emailing them in the morning that I would not be returning to work) and not working any notice period.

I haven't had any communication from the company since I left and the recruiter who found me the role says that I won't be paid as I broke the contract. Is that right? Surely I should be paid for the 3 days I worked there? What are my rights?

Any advice is welcome. Thanks

JeffKenna

If I left a job after 3 days I wouldn't be going back looking for money.

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy

JeffKenna wrote: »

If I left a job after 3 days I wouldn't be going back looking for money.

More fool you, I would.

Don't let it go. Call up to the office/workplace if you have to.

livedadream

to be honest, i wouldnt bother, its three days, they wont be paying the recruiter either, most people arnt even on the payroll after three days.

Alfasud

I have heard of a couple of cases where lads went to work in sales for the same company. Payment was on a commission basis. They traveled far and wide trying to sell for a Broadcasting Co. They lasted approx a week each. In the meantime they used their own vehicle and fuel and any sales they made would not be paid for until 9 weeks had passed. This job cost them money and they didn't get paid as far as I know. They probably had a lineup of poor fellows thinking they were going to make a fortune. So to make a long story short the company had slaves doing the job. I have heard of this senario in the Restaurant business also where waitresses are taken on a trial basis and never hear from them again. Of course you should ask for your payment. You did the work after all. However it will be a miracle if you get it. Don't forget to let the Recruitment Co know about the conditions. Hope this is helpful.

Yummymummy83

Alfasud wrote: »

I have heard of a couple of cases where lads went to work in sales for the same company. Payment was on a commission basis. They traveled far and wide trying to sell for a Broadcasting Co. They lasted approx a week each. In the meantime they used their own vehicle and fuel and any sales they made would not be paid for until 9 weeks had passed. This job cost them money and they didn't get paid as far as I know. They probably had a lineup of poor fellows thinking they were going to make a fortune. So to make a long story short the company had slaves doing the job. I have heard of this senario in the Restaurant business also where waitresses are taken on a trial basis and never hear from them again. Of course you should ask for your payment. You did the work after all. However it will be a miracle if you get it. Don't forget to let the Recruitment Co know about the conditions. Hope this is helpful.

That sounds more like a self-employed contractor situation. A lot of sales roles would fall into this and there is zero protection for them.

In the OPs case however she was engaged under a contract of employment and is entitled to be paid. I would definitely get in touch with the company, and let them know you will be complaining to workplace relations if no joy. Absolutely no reason why you shouldn't be paid and if the conditions are that bad I don't blame you for walking out

Shelflife

So the Op signed a contract worked for three days and then simply upped and left. Didnt work any notice and failed to honour their side of the contract, but the want the company to honour their part of the contract even though they were landed in the **** and let down badly by the OP.

Good luck with that !!

Mrs OBumble

OP, of course you should be paid for the days you worked. Get Citizens Infomration to help you approach the employer about it.

You don't say what was desperate about it, which might be why folks here aren't sympathetic ... but most places would prefer that if you're not going to last you leave quickly.

Did the recruiter warn you about the conditions before you started?

livedadream

Shelflife wrote: »

So the Op signed a contract worked for three days and then simply upped and left. Didnt work any notice and failed to honour their side of the contract, !!

Youre not obligated to give notice after three days.

Shelflife

You're obligated to honour the contract you signed.

The company would be perfectly entitled to sue the OP for any costs incurred as a result of him not fulfilling the agreed contract.

livedadream

Shelflife wrote: »

You're obligated to honour the contract you signed.

The company would be perfectly entitled to sue the OP for any costs incurred as a result of him not fulfilling the agreed contract.

No they wouldn't, most work contracts state the quote the minimum terms of notice act which states no notice is required by either party within the first 13 weeks

Yummymummy83

Shelflife wrote: »

You're obligated to honour the contract you signed.

The company would be perfectly entitled to sue the OP for any costs incurred as a result of him not fulfilling the agreed contract.

No they wouldn't. I love how some people are under the impression that people are bound to their employer like minions. If you do not like a job you are perfectly entitled to terminate your employment.

Shelflife

Yummymummy83 wrote: »

No they wouldn't. I love how some people are under the impression that people are bound to their employer like minions. If you do not like a job you are perfectly entitled to terminate your employment.

Of course you can terminate a contract, and if you do so under the agreed terms there won't be an issue.

I'm just saying that a contract is between two parties in this case and both have obligations under this contract.

Mrs OBumble

No matter what the contract says, if a person has only just started then most employers would prefer to see them leave immediately than waste any more time on initial training.

Edups

Shelflife wrote: »

You're obligated to honour the contract you signed.

The company would be perfectly entitled to sue the OP for any costs incurred as a result of him not fulfilling the agreed contract.

Get a grip, that fall from your high horse could hurt.

Shelflife

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

No matter what the contract says, if a person has only just started then most employers would prefer to see them leave immediately than waste any more time on initial training.

Edups wrote: »

Get a grip, that fall from your high horse could hurt.

True Mrs O B, agree totally .

Edups lets assume that that there is a weeks notice written into the contract, if the Company decided that it wasnt working out they would be obliged to pay the weeks notice, the company would expect the OP to see through his side of the bargain.

Its not a high horse, as an employer is a total pain to go through the whole interview process and then for the OP to email in to say "I dont like it im not coming in anymore" well its unprofessional and frankly childish.

Edups

Shelflife wrote: »

Its not a high horse, as an employer is a total pain to go through the whole interview process and then for the OP to email in to say "I dont like it im not coming in anymore" well its unprofessional and frankly childish.

How was the OP to know the job wasn't going to suit before starting? The first week is usually training, what a waste of time training someone for them to leave the day it finishes. and most employers would have had a shortlist of candidates they'd be looking to take on, you could in theory phone up candidate number 2 and ask them if they want the job. Even if the OP stayed they wouldn't have had any work ethic and likely would have done barely any work.

But none of this is the point he worked for the 3 days he has earned that 3 days pay. If he worked 3 days at 8 hours for 9.15 p/h he's owed 220 before tax. Especially coming to Christmas that is a fair amount of money.

Shelflife

Edups wrote: »

How was the OP to know the job wasn't going to suit before starting? The first week is usually training, what a waste of time training someone for them to leave the day it finishes. and most employers would have had a shortlist of candidates they'd be looking to take on, you could in theory phone up candidate number 2 and ask them if they want the job. Even if the OP stayed they wouldn't have had any work ethic and likely would have done barely any work.

But none of this is the point he worked for the 3 days he has earned that 3 days pay. If he worked 3 days at 8 hours for 9.15 p/h he's owed 220 before tax. Especially coming to Christmas that is a fair amount of money.

I agree with you !

My point is though, that the OP behaved in an unprofessional manner and walked off the job, he also failed to honour the contract he signed. Despite this he expects the company to behave in a professional manner, honour their side of the contract and pay him for the hours that he worked.

Its the double standard that bugs me.

Yummymummy83

Shelflife wrote: »

I agree with you !

My point is though, that the OP behaved in an unprofessional manner and walked off the job, he also failed to honour the contract he signed. Despite this he expects the company to behave in a professional manner, honour their side of the contract and pay him for the hours that he worked.

Its the double standard that bugs me.

The OP worked for 3 days and decided not to return thus terminating the contract. The contract no longer exists so you cannot claim they failed to honour it. They did their contractual duties until the time it ended.

It is not unprofessional to terminate a contract either party is perfectly entitled. You have no idea of the circumstances that motivated the OP to end their contract.

Sure it's a pain to have to recruit again but that's just life. Maybe the employer would be best served by considering why the employee left and addressing the issues so that it doesn't happen with future recruits. The OP owes the employer nothing and I'm glad they had the self worth not to subject themself to a situation that made them unhappy or uncomfortable. You can be assured the employer wouldn't think twice about terminating the contract should they feel they had reason to.

Throwing a hissy and slinging blame at the employee who's left is far more unprofessional.

Shelflife

Yummymummy83 wrote: »

The OP worked for 3 days and decided not to return thus terminating the contract. The contract no longer exists so you cannot claim they failed to honour it. They did their contractual duties until the time it ended.

It is not unprofessional to terminate a contract either party is perfectly entitled. You have no idea of the circumstances that motivated the OP to end their contract.

Just walking away may well terminate the contract but not the responsibility that lies therein. Try that with a bank or a utility company and see how you get on.

The Op said that he did not work his notice, therefore he is in breach of contract.

If the company told the op that they no longer required him after three days and refused to pay him the notice that they agreed to in the contract they too would be in breach of the contract.

Its not unprofessional to terminate a contract as long as its done in the proper way, refusing to work the notice that you agreed to, is unprofessional.

Yummymummy83

Shelflife wrote: »

Just walking away may well terminate the contract but not the responsibility that lies therein. Try that with a bank or a utility company and see how you get on.

The Op said that he did not work his notice, therefore he is in breach of contract.

If the company told the op that they no longer required him after three days and refused to pay him the notice that they agreed to in the contract they too would be in breach of the contract.

Its not unprofessional to terminate a contract as long as its done in the proper way, refusing to work the notice that you agreed to, is unprofessional.

There is no notice required during the first 13 weeks of employment.

If you sign a contract with a utility company (which btw is very different to an employment contract ) you have a cooling off period. Similar to the OPS situation the utility company would be entitled to payment for services rendered, likewise the OP is entitled for the work done.

Shelflife

Yummymummy83 wrote: »

There is no notice required during the first 13 weeks of employment.

If you sign a contract with a utility company (which btw is very different to an employment contract ) you have a cooling off period. Similar to the OPS situation the utility company would be entitled to payment for services rendered, likewise the OP is entitled for the work done.

If you sign a contract that stipulates a certain amount of notice then you are bound by that, the op alludes to not working notice.

In the same way the company would have to pay or allow him to work his notice.

Edups

Shelflife wrote: »

If you sign a contract that stipulates a certain amount of notice then you are bound by that, the op alludes to not working notice.

In the same way the company would have to pay or allow him to work his notice.

In fairness the OP might not have known the notice period doesn't apply for the first 13 weeks.

Shelflife

Edups wrote: »

In fairness the OP might not have known the notice period doesn't apply for the first 13 weeks.

It only applies if there is nothing in the contract regarding notice, if there's a notice period in the contract then that applies.