2 month leave notice in my contract

bennyineire

Hey Peps,

Very close to getting a new job offer in the next week (fingers crossed).
I just checked my contract to see what it says in regards to leave notice.
I noticed that it says 2 months, I really though it was 1.
over the last 2 years at least 10 people have left (there are over 200 employees) and they all gave 1 months notice without issue.

I just gonna give 1 months notice and see what happens, 2 months is ridiculous IMHO.

What are the ramifications if they insist on 2 months, I work in IT and there will be a considerable hand over and they might insist.

But I'm at the stage where I need to get out as the job is affecting my mental well being at this stage.

Any of your thoughts on this ?

Stheno

Its up to the company and how flexible they are.

You can cite previous examples of people leaving within a month to back up your case and hope that covers you

jimmycrackcorm

Unless there is some compelling reason to prevent you from leaving earlier than two months then I'd just ignore it. Companies put the clause in to cover scenarios where it might be essential but courts won't uphold it where it just appears to be a technique to prevent someone from earning a living.

bennyineire

Stheno wrote: »

Its up to the company and how flexible they are.

You can cite previous examples of people leaving within a month to back up your case and hope that covers you

Cheers but just wondering what they can do legally if I refused to work the second month but they insist that I do

Irish_Elect_Eng

They "could" take you to court, but they won't unless you are in the C-Suite.

They will most likely not give you a reference, or give a poor one, that could be a potential problem in future.

davo10

It's unlikely that they would force you to work the second month, but the implications of having no/poor reference depends on the job/industry. Potential employers will often check with previous employers as well as current ones. How important would a bad reference (verbal, not written) be to you?

Mrs OBumble

bennyineire wrote: »

...I need to get out as the job is affecting my mental well being at this stage.

If they bring it up, say that you will need to consult your doctor. Then do, and get yourself signed out for the second month.

Allinall

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

If they bring it up, say that you will need to consult your doctor. Then do, and get yourself signed out for the second month.

So you're suggesting-

Lying to a doctor
Deceiving one employer
Working for another employer while on a sick cert

Worst possible advice to give.

Car99

Give them one months notice, they probably don't even know it says two months in your contract.

Mrs OBumble

Allinall wrote: »

So you're suggesting-

Lying to a doctor
Deceiving one employer
Working for another employer while on a sick cert

Worst possible advice to give.

Nothing of the sort.

Explain the truth , as referenced in the first post, and the vastmajoritu of GPs will sign you out of that job quick smart. If the new job is different they'll also say youre fit for it.

TallGlass

Allinall wrote: »

So you're suggesting-

Lying to a doctor
Deceiving one employer
Working for another employer while on a sick cert

Worst possible advice to give.

Well firstly. I would just get signed off regardless. OP mentioned he wasn't in a good place, take some time off might be best in this situation to take time away and look at the situation they are in.

Samuel T. Cogley

I have never, ever heard of anyone being taken to court for failing to see out their notice. It would be a nightmare of a case to pursue and so easily defended. It extreme cases I could see a company doing it out of sheer spite, but this would be a senior manager/director a company wanted to screw with. References might be an issue - you may have cover that with the new employer. They may take the line though of saying "well, do the two months".

IT is by its very nature routine. If there is a massive handover period it's due to 'knowing where the bodies are buried' which is purely management incompetence. Four weeks handover is more that enough unless the job is ridiculously difficult to recruit for.

bennyineire

Thanks all,

I actually have a good relationship with management and I am liked there but the job is going nowhere and it's time to move on plus the role is under-payed (company are bad payers).

I don't think there will be an issue but I just wanted to see what the norm is out there. And yep I agree 4 weeks is plenty time for a handover.

helimachoptor

bennyineire wrote: »

Thanks all,

I actually have a good relationship with management and I am liked there but the job is going nowhere and it's time to move on plus the role is under-payed (company are bad payers).

I don't think there will be an issue but I just wanted to see what the norm is out there. And yep I agree 4 weeks is plenty time for a handover.

I've 2 in mine and i'd be pretty sure i'd be required to stay. We've a few people who've left recently with 3 months and they were required to fulfil their obligations.

I'd agree in general that a month is enough time aslong as you get that month with your replacement.

Samuel T. Cogley

helimachoptor wrote: »

I've 2 in mine and i'd be pretty sure i'd be required to stay. We've a few people who've left recently with 3 months and they were required to fulfil their obligations.

I'd agree in general that a month is enough time aslong as you get that month with your replacement.

I think an employer would really struggle to enforce 2-3 months. There might be exceptions where the employee was in the job a long time or if the company gave reciprocal notice lengths in their employment contract, but where the terms aren't up for negotiation, as in most employment contracts, I'd be dubious.

The company could make things difficult of course, such as refusal to give a reference. The problem with these notice requirements is the justification will be 'It takes us at least 4 weeks to hire a replacement and then we need a handover' well that's fine but it become ridiculous if the standard becomes 2 or 3 months.

helimachoptor

Libertarian Kant wrote: »

I think an employer would really struggle to enforce 2-3 months. There might be exceptions where the employee was in the job a long time or if the company gave reciprocal notice lengths in their employment contract, but where the terms aren't up for negotiation, as in most employment contracts, I'd be dubious.

The company could make things difficult of course, such as refusal to give a reference. The problem with these notice requirements is the justification will be 'It takes us at least 4 weeks to hire a replacement and then we need a handover' well that's fine but it become ridiculous if the standard becomes 2 or 3 months.

If those people were being made be redundant they would be paid for 3 months as their notice period.

I think the need for a replacement has been the big issue in making them work their full notice period.

Samuel T. Cogley

helimachoptor wrote: »

If those people were being made be redundant they would be paid for 3 months as their notice period.

I think the need for a replacement has been the big issue in making them work their full notice period.

Could very well be fair and upheld in that scenario as there is reciprocal notice. The rather rambling (sorry) point I'm making is check notice periods in your contract OP.

sashafierce

This post has been deleted.

skallywag

There will be no ramifications concerning them going down any legal avenue, but to be honest if you signed a contract with a 2 month notice period then from a professional expectation perspective you should work it out if asked to do so. You agreed to it under the Terms and Conditions of being offered the job.

I would not hire someone into my team who I knew had renegaded on an agreed notice period, if asked to work it out.

That said, as soon as an employee has decided to leave, then most managers will want them out the door ASAP. I would genuinely bring the topic up directly with your manager, there is a very good chance that they will leave you go early.