Jump to content

Is Your Job Safe?


salmonbuddie

Recommended Posts


Ah, it's a complex area, but regarding the payment issues, on looking at the specific terms the company has written, the required repayment is, unfortunately, legal. To be legal it has to be able to be classed as a 'liquidated damages' clause, and not a penalty clause. In plain English this means that the employer should be able to argue that the amount repayable is based on a genuine pre-estimate of loss and not just to penalise the employee for leaving. In this case, the sliding scale of liability would tend to show that the employer realises that as time goes on they accept that they have had some benefit resulting from the employee's training, and so the liability for repayment is reduced. On the other hand, whilst the educational training is still ongoing, they have not received any benefit and so would claim back the full whack.

Frustrating, but I really can't see any tribunal making a finding against them, it seems pretty watertight to me. Even more annoying is that as the salary payment is the final one, they can indeed deduct the full amount in one go. Morally right to do it to an employee who has served impeccably? No. Legal? Yes.

Regarding the contacting of the other employer, this is a difficult one also. What exactly is the nature of their contact / conversations?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of curiosity, would he be entitled to some sort of receipt/invoice that states that he, in effect, paid for the training which he can then pass on to his new employer for them to reimburse him - or something like that (I tend to use that phrase a lot when talking about legal stuff)? If the first company does not supply him with a receipt, can he then claim that they took the money from him "fraudulently"? After all, if they have paid the college, or whatever, then they will have a receipt from the college.

Also, not directed at ZA, did his previous company claim the ESA, or whatever it is called, on his behalf as part payment of the course. Make sure they don't take that amount from him if they did as that is essentially "his money".

All looks a bit muddy to me.

I know exactly what you mean. One thing the company absolutely has to do is make the deduction in a legally correct way, and that includes the deduction, and a clear description of what the deduction is for, within the payslip for the pay period in question. That payslip then ought to suffice as proof that the employee is the one who has effectively paid for it.

I would also back up the second part of your post and say it is definitely worthwhile checking how the company paid for the course to begin with - as SBF said, was the funding completely out of their own pocket or did part of the payment come from a State source of funds etc. indeed they are only allowed to claim back (as I mentioned in my post a couple back though not in these terms) their own true loss, not losses incurred by others etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Employment - I need some advice on a situation over a 'notice period' if anyone could help please smile.png

Incidentally 77%

Not read the whole thread but go on acas website an it has everything you need. If you have queries they can tell you over the phone. Great service

ETA have now and there's far better insight from other posters. Once you have all the details acas will fight your corner for free if your in the right. Employers usually shit it at the sight of acas comunications.

Edited by slapsalmon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not read the whole thread but go on acas website an it has everything you need. If you have queries they can tell you over the phone. Great service

ETA have now and there's far better insight from other posters. Once you have all the details acas will fight your corner for free if your in the right. Employers usually shit it at the sight of acas comunications.

ACAS CAN provide good advice to employees, but employers do NOT shit it when ACAS get in touch. lol.gif

I would strongly advise your lad, WDWB, to NOT go there.

In fact I would advise (from an impeccable source - a top HR Consultant) that he does the opposite.

I'll explain...

ZA is quite right. It may seem that what the company has done appears slightly unfair, but it is perfectly legal. That's a fact. He signed contracts, he made undertakings. ZA has nailed it. As usual. smile.png

Look at it from oldco's point of view. What your son has done could not only be seen to be an attempt at illegality, breaking his contract, trying to walk away from a debt to which he'd agreed, but he has started work with a competitor.

His old employer would be rightly pissed off for the investment it's made in him, the goodwill rejected. It would understandably call the newco and ask whether he was 'induced' to break his contracts by the new employer. Nothing underhand about being angry and querying this... Unless the new employer DID suggest to your son that he did so, or even offered a bonus to start early... Now that WOULD BE underhand... And very naughty! (Is your lad called "Brian", WDWB?)

Your son has made a mistake: a costly one for him. An expensive lesson to learn, I'm afraid. The repayment of their training investment in him will be a bog-standard process that would have run down, unnoticed, unremarked, till he had worked it off. He signed up for that. There's no wriggle-room.

Breaking your employment contract by walking out earlier than you'd signed up for is another big mistake. ZA has said all this...

He should have talked to the oldco's HR, explained his financial position and offered to pay off his debt over a period perhaps OR, he should have explained (could still do) to his new employer about it and sought/ seek a forwarding of some wages... Companies do that all the time, especially for someone they desire as an employee.

But the real reason I offer all the above is that, if he goes to ACAS, if he tries to prolong the painful process (one he is unlikely to profit from), then he will mightily piss off the oldco... Which is obviously already less than pleased by his behaviour.

If references are to be asked for in future, then theirs will point out how he jumped ship, broke his contract tried to avoid repayment of debt, took them to ACAS .... and lost. In Pharma, I'd guess things are quite well regulated, so best to be as squeaky clean, as possible.

To avoid the above, it wouldn't be going too far to suggest that he writes to oldco, apologising for his youthful mistake and misunderstanding and ensuring that he repays his debt. It would be the right thing to do. It's a bugger, but we all make mistakes when we're young.... sad.png

To finish with a Pharma-analogy...

It's a bitter pill. ACAS can't sugar coat it.

Edited by bluto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The younger ones will be fine. Many people lose their jobs at least once. It's bad news to suffer it but most recover. It's the older ones who might have more problems getting another job. Been there myself when I was young.

I sit in bewilderment sometimes listening to young ones in my industry. They are on good money but many go out and purchase fancy cars taking on thousands in debt , on top of that they purchase very expensive property . A harsh lesson will be learned unfortuantly . Yes it's hard for older people to find jobs that's why I have a plan to go self employed . 6 months ago our company changed our contracts from one month salary for each years service to one weeks salary for each year so we all knew what was coming.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sit in bewilderment sometimes listening to young ones in my industry. They are on good money but many go out and purchase fancy cars taking on thousands in debt , on top of that they purchase very expensive property . A harsh lesson will be learned unfortuantly . Yes it's hard for older people to find jobs that's why I have a plan to go self employed . 6 months ago our company changed our contracts from one month salary for each years service to one weeks salary for each year so we all knew what was coming.

Yeah what you highlighted there is definitely a problem.

To work in the oil industry and be earning so much money but not have more than 6-12 months of money saved away is excessively risky.

It's an age old problem. How do you tell people they can't have something when they want it today?

I remember my parents buying a smaller house rather than a bigger house which required his overtime (which he'd been getting for years) to continue. Months after buying the smaller house he lost his overtime and interest rates shot through the roof (15% or thereabouts). They were able to withstand that sort of shock.

They borrowed on the assumption of just one salary. Another sensible precaution which young people fail to adhere to leaving them in trouble when the wife gets pregnant and they realise that a huge chunk of her salary will be going on childcare.

Good luck with the self employment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah what you highlighted there is definitely a problem.

To work in the oil industry and be earning so much money but not have more than 6-12 months of money saved away is excessively risky.

It's an age old problem. How do you tell people they can't have something when they want it today?

I remember my parents buying a smaller house rather than a bigger house which required his overtime (which he'd been getting for years) to continue. Months after buying the smaller house he lost his overtime and interest rates shot through the roof (15% or thereabouts). They were able to withstand that sort of shock.

They borrowed on the assumption of just one salary. Another sensible precaution which young people fail to adhere to leaving them in trouble when the wife gets pregnant and they realise that a huge chunk of her salary will be going on childcare.

Good luck with the self employment.

thanks however so far so good still employed, fingers crossed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aye.

It can be good - even eye-opening and inspirational for some people - but, as is usually the case, one size disnae it all.

It can be the end of a decent life for many.

True. It can be a devastating blow from which many may never fully recover.

The idea that you can compare voluntary redundancy with a mandatory payoff is stupid beyond belief.

Also your ability to walk into another job quickly depends on so many things that it's not worth generalising.

I've never forgotten my own experience of it even though I recovered financially relatively quickly.

It's a hard thing for a person to take when you walk into your work - a job you love - and then find your boss telling you that you're no longer needed.

Especially when you are not expecting it.

Never trust anyone who claims that an unexpected and mandatory redundancy from a job you love is somehow a good thing.

I'd assume, probably rightly, that they had never suffered that fate themselves.

Edited by oaksoft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wondered why so surprisingly many had voted "Yes"...

Happy anniversary. :whistle:

We found an anti-viral agent that worked, that's why. It's known as the truth, aka seeing beyond the lies. Many refused treatment , though, but we still keep trying to get it out there.

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wondered why so surprisingly many had voted "Yes"...

Happy anniversary. whistling.gif:

We found an anti-viral agent that worked, that's why. It's known as the truth, aka seeing beyond the lies. Many refused treatment , though, but we still keep trying to get it out there.

smile.png

That anti-viral agent was discovered by the Scottish Agricultural Research Centre.

They found that when given to sheep it stopped them all running away from perceived danger and trotting off the edge of a cliff.

The drug buys them more time to think about the perceived danger and realise that actually the "wolf" they were seeing was simply a harmless rabbit with a sore throat.

Published in Nature journal I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That anti-viral agent was discovered by the Scottish Agricultural Research Centre.

They found that when given to sheep it stopped them all running away from perceived danger and trotting off the edge of a cliff.

The drug buys them more time to think about the perceived danger and realise that actually the "wolf" they were seeing was simply a harmless rabbit with a sore throat.

Published in Nature journal I believe.

It'll hopefully stop the next generations voting Yes...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...