Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Unflip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Unflip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

To work these notice periods are ridiculous?

86 replies

Duckingella · 03/06/2024 10:35

Company DH works for has a new owner;new order has issued new contracts.

DH has read new contract after receiving it this morning and found that the new owner wants a notice period of 6 weeks for employees who have been there less than one month and 12 weeks for those there more than one month.

I personally feel a 12 week notice period basically make it impossible for anyone to get a new job as not many potential employers would be prepared to wait 3 months to fill a position once a job offer is made.

As above 6 weeks is still a long time to wait.

I think a more reasonable notice period should be 1 week for less than a months service and 4 weeks after that.

OP posts:

lanthanum · 03/06/2024 11:55

StarlightLady · 03/06/2024 11:23

TUPE? Didn’t P&O Ferries appalling treatment of their staff show this is a nonsense?

Show quote history

There are plenty of companies who do things the right way. I know people who have gained from TUPE, as when they have been assimilated to their new employer's payscale, they have been moved to the next notch up the heirarchy in order to preserve their pay & benefits.

LlynTegid · 03/06/2024 11:54

Three months for senior roles I can understand and accept. The notice period for someone in their first month seems over the top and to be honest some people would just abandon the job or be off sick for some of it.

NashvilleQueen · 03/06/2024 11:52

3 months standard at my grade and accepted by HR depts as the default

Quitelikeacatslife · 03/06/2024 11:51

It protects him, if there were changes and he was let go they'd have to pay him 3 months. Most likely if he handed his notice in they'd agree for him to leave sooner and he'd agree to waive his notice , something like that.

Maddy70 · 03/06/2024 11:28

Mine has always been 3 months in my sector

Rocknrollstar · 03/06/2024 11:26

3 months is fairly standard. when I left my last job I gave the 1 month notice required in my contract. My line manager said it wasn’t giving them enough time to replace me. I pointed out that if they had given me a better contract (which was available) I would have had to give them the 3 months. Teachers have to give half a term’s notice. Some firms don’t make staff work the 3 months but send them on gardening leave so the knowledge they take with them is not quite so up to date.

AlltheFs · 03/06/2024 11:24

3-6 calendar months in my sector, 3 for less senior and 6 for senior.

It really depends on the type of role.

It not unusual for it to be a 9 month recruitment process (from advert to start date) for senior posts in HE.

StarlightLady · 03/06/2024 11:23

lanthanum · 03/06/2024 10:47

Yes, the notice periods are normally the same either way. When DH's company closed their UK office they discovered that the staff were on a mix of 1/3/6 month notice periods, and they had to keep paying them.

You might want to read up on the TUPE regulations, which govern changes to contract when a company changes ownership. This is an interesting one though, as they can't force changes unless they are an improvement, and because notice periods are two way, it's not clear which way this one goes.

If there's any risk of restructuring under the new ownership, a longer notice period might be an advantage.

TUPE? Didn’t P&O Ferries appalling treatment of their staff show this is a nonsense?

GentlemanJohnny · 03/06/2024 11:23

All of my jobs had 3 month notice periods.

OnGoldenPond · 03/06/2024 11:22

It's fine having a three month notice period if you are in a more senior position where that is the norm. You won't be at a disadvantage when applying for new jobs as all candidates will have the same terms.

However OP has said this is much longer than normal for her DH's job level and industry so it would be a barrier to getting another job as most other candidates would be able to start much sooner. I would think this would be regarded as an unfair contract term as it limits the employee's ability to change jobs. Though IANAL but have come across these situations before. In practice the employer generally knows this and is willing to negotiate an earlier leave date in return for a good handover.

If I was your DH I would push back on this clause and point out it is unfair and probably unenforceable in this industry.

HollaHolla · 03/06/2024 11:17

As soon as I got to a middle management post, it's been 3 months. Absolutely standard in my sector (Higher Education.)

frankentall · 03/06/2024 11:15

Employers are perfectly fine to wait. Not in my experience - they want to try to get you in ASAP but still have you on 3 months when you join.

SilentSilhouette · 03/06/2024 11:11

3 months notice has become much more common in any professional or skilled job.

He could look round for somewhere else to work, but he might find that the contract is the same.

Ereyraa · 03/06/2024 11:02

It’s standard in finance; it jumps to 6 months for more senior positions

Employers are perfectly fine to wait.

SpringleDingle · 03/06/2024 11:02

My notice period is 3 months.. normal in my industry in the UK

leopardski · 03/06/2024 11:01

3 months is very, very common these days. I personally think it’s crap as by the time someone hands in their notice they’re so close to checking out, and 12 weeks is just such a long time (a quarter of the year!) but yes, standard especially in my industry. Many negotiate it down in my experience to ~6-8 weeks.

nootropiccoffee · 03/06/2024 10:57

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

frankentall · 03/06/2024 10:57

It's utter shit though - I am on 3 months and have been the last few jobs EVERY time I get a new job, the new employer wants to put me on 3 months but also expects me to try and negotiate a quicker start

nootropiccoffee · 03/06/2024 10:56

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

User2460177 · 03/06/2024 10:50

Notice periods generally Cavour the employee as they need to be given notice or paid for it but an employee can’t be forced to work notice. Three months is standard for most skilled roles.

TeenLifeMum · 03/06/2024 10:50

3 months is standard in my industry. It gives time for hand over and recruitment to be well underway if not completed.

SpringKitten · 03/06/2024 10:50

3 months standard for management or skilled jobs. Impossible to get replacement staff and handover inside one month. New employer would be on same terms.

6 months is tricky, my dh has that and quit a job with no new role to go to and took a chance on finding something! He was out of work for only two months. It took several months to hire him due to slow process of interviews

Teamarugula · 03/06/2024 10:49

That’s very standard isn’t it? I’ve had a 3 month notice period everywhere I’ve worked, and never had any issues with new employers waiting out the notice period.

Original poster

Duckingella · 03/06/2024 10:49

He's in a pretty generic industry;you could say semi skilled as you need to do a training course and license to do it but in general when people need to fill roles in this industry they want to do so quickly.

The irony is that DH's new boss wouldn't want to wait that long to fill a role either.

OP posts:

mitogoshi · 03/06/2024 10:49

I'm on 3 months, dp is on 6 months. Quite normal

Unflip

1 2 3 4