Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think that refusing to do an handover so you can be called back as a consultant is a dick move?

155 replies

AFewScrewsLucy · 24/10/2021 20:45

Colleague handed in notice. And has outright refused to do a handover of knowledge, because they wants company to keep them on with a retainer and consultancy fees. so when a particular procedure happens, the company would have to being them back and pay them to do the work? They are leaving to start their new business in consultancy for this procedure.There is a member of staff that will be taking the role on and the procedure is quite specific to the company.
Is this person a dick, or that's just how business works etc.

OP posts:
Hont1986 · 24/10/2021 22:19

Get IT to install a secret keylogger/screen recorder on their system. Then get this person to run their report without having to teach anyone. Now you've got a video of their process.

Windinmyhair · 24/10/2021 22:25

Given the employee is still on company time, presumably they are in breach of contract by not doing as requested.

If I was the manager, I'd look to arrange training for you from the development company.

I would also be looking at their contract for any non compete clauses which companies sometimes have, look at taking them to court for breach of contract, or start a disciplinary process (which would then affect references that would be given. References might not be the most important, but the person might need them in the early days of their business).

Windinmyhair · 24/10/2021 22:26

@Hont1986 fantastic!

Original poster
AFewScrewsLucy · 24/10/2021 22:28

@User527294627

I don’t think your colleague is an asshole for not sharing a process they’ve developed themselves, for free. If the company needs this knowledge they have to pay for it. Or they have to trust that you can work it out, which at the moment they clearly don’t. Maybe you will get the opportunity to prove to them that you can once your colleague has left.
They haven't done it "for free" they're paid to do the job in which they developed the procedure on company time, on company resources after being sent in a training course the company paid for... What part of that is them doing it "for free?" Confused
OP posts:
GnomeDePlume · 24/10/2021 22:28

I can see how companies find themselves in this position. They implement a system but then leave development to an in-house person. At the time it suits the company as this type of development is highly bespoke and also very cheap. The in-house developer gets minimal reward for their work as the company downplays its value basically because it was free to them.

Now the company is stuck. I am in STB ex-employee's position except that I don't have anyone to handover to. My employers are having to offer far more than I was paid even to get any interest from candidates.

Fetarabbit · 24/10/2021 22:31

@User527294627

I don’t think your colleague is an asshole for not sharing a process they’ve developed themselves, for free. If the company needs this knowledge they have to pay for it. Or they have to trust that you can work it out, which at the moment they clearly don’t. Maybe you will get the opportunity to prove to them that you can once your colleague has left.
Where does OP say he developed it for free? Presumably it was in works time, using works resources and for a work process.
mytortoiseisill · 24/10/2021 22:31

OP can the process not be re-engineered by accessing his emails?

In terms of intellectual property, this is “know-how”. Faccenda chicken is your friend. If the process is a genuine secret then it is capable of protection &Clearly belongs to the company so he’s in breach. If not, they just need to issue an instruction to train you up &stop being a tit.

Either way, he loses -if the technique is protectable, it’s not his to sell.

WoodliceCollection · 24/10/2021 22:32

This is literally the entire premise of capitalism, I'm not sure how bothered I could be by it working as intended.

GnomeDePlume · 24/10/2021 22:33

The development is free (or very cheap) in the sense that the employer didn't have to pay for an external developer. Dick in IT was being paid anyway. The devopment didn't cost extra.

The employer should never have allowed this situation to develop in the first place. In my own situation this has occurred because the employer wanted to save money and so cut staffing levels to the bone.

mytortoiseisill · 24/10/2021 22:33

“This is literally the entire premise of capitalism, I'm not sure how bothered I could be by it working as intended.”

???

2Two · 24/10/2021 22:35

But how was company supposed to force then to share knowledge?

They should have insisted on it from Day 1 of the person's employment, and disciplined them if they wouldn't co-operate. OK, so that might mean them leaving and some knowledge going with them, but at that point it would be too little to matter.

asteroommatus · 24/10/2021 22:39

[quote AFewScrewsLucy]@asteroommatus Discipline him...how...by firing him? And him not sharing that knowledge...???[/quote]
Disciplinary doesn't mean firing.

Why would you jump to the conclusion that disciplinary automatically means firing?

But if they had either way the only person who knows the process will no longer be working for the company.

KrisAkabusi · 24/10/2021 22:44

Any processes developed while working for the company belong to the company. Refusing to do a handover is a breach of contract. Management need to bring the future consultant in, point this out to them, and tell them that disciplinary procedures will begin if handover doesn't start immediately. And be prepared to go through with it.

EmeraldShamrock · 24/10/2021 22:44

They'll learn a valuable lesson here.
I'm surprised it isn't in a contract for medical staff, if it was they could sue him.
I've had it written in contracts of shitty jobs.

asteroommatus · 24/10/2021 22:49

I'm supposed to be their replacement. I think they're being self serving. I am confident that I and the other involved colleagues know enough. This person is waltzing about telling anyone who'll listen how they've got company over a barrell etc. Just think they're a dickhead and don't want them to "win". I'm petty.

Then there's no issue.

Theres very little in reporting that can not be reverse engineered.

I head up my companies reporting division. The woman who did the job before me deleted loads of stuff before she left (she was given a choice of handing her notice in or being sacked). We worked it out. I rebuilt somethings and improved them as I went as the old versions were extremely complicated.

If you know the systems and know what the aim of the report is, with all the information needing including, I am sure you can sort this.

He is likely to be over estimating his value.

asteroommatus · 24/10/2021 22:50

Oh and yes, anything I developed while in employment is the property of company.

ChrisS36 · 24/10/2021 22:53

Any process you develop whilst employed is the employers intellectual property.

RampantIvy · 24/10/2021 23:03

@AFewScrewsLucy

But how was company supposed to force then to share knowledge? Because given for this form,they just wouldn't have done it...? And would have just done what they've done and handed in notice and refused a handover...
The company I work for is very anti "silo working". It's company policy that this doesn't happen. Eveyone in my team can do at least one other person's job.

It sounds like the employee's knowledge is intellectual property belonging to your company. They should get legal advice over this. The employee is being very short sighted because it won't do their reputation any good.

Butchyrestingface · 24/10/2021 23:06

They haven't done it "for free" they're paid to do the job in which they developed the procedure on company time, on company resources after being sent in a training course the company paid for... What part of that is them doing it "for free?" confused

Were they paid to develop procedure though, as in, was it an expectation of the company that they would develop procedures and was that what the training was intended to teach them to do?

Or did this eager beaver go above and beyond the call of duty in doing so?

PackedintheUK · 24/10/2021 23:10

@Butchyrestingface

They haven't done it "for free" they're paid to do the job in which they developed the procedure on company time, on company resources after being sent in a training course the company paid for... What part of that is them doing it "for free?" confused

Were they paid to develop procedure though, as in, was it an expectation of the company that they would develop procedures and was that what the training was intended to teach them to do?

Or did this eager beaver go above and beyond the call of duty in doing so?

It doesn't matter. He did it in work time for a work process using work equipment. It belongs to the employer.
SpiceRat · 24/10/2021 23:15

You keep asking how to make them share the info. Retroactivity you can’t I suppose, the company needs to learn from this and put into place procedures to ensure that processes developed are documents and training guides developed as necessary. What happened when this colleague was on holiday or what would have happened if they went off sick? Absolutely a massive oversight. When your colleague started developing this processes and it was deemed necessary to do this process management should have asked colleague to create a how to manual or whatever, by a certain date. If this was not met then disciplinary action in whatever form should follow. For example this raised in a 1/2/1 or similar, employee put on a performance management review as refusing / incapable of completing work, then warnings / sackings come.

Company dropped a bollock, employee, while morally questionable, has them over a barrel. Their own stupid fault.

ErrolTheDragon · 24/10/2021 23:21

You're caught between inadequate management and this colossal dick, OP.

Sure, this blokes manager should have made sure there was some sort of documentation of this probably not very mysterious process before now, but of course he should hand over a process he developed for your company, on their time and money in his remaining time with the company. It was his job to do that, people saying he did it for free or that it didn't cost the company anything are being daft.

Hopefully your management will send him packing with his tail between his legs and you can get on and sort it out - quite possibly better.

Cheerbear23 · 24/10/2021 23:23

Can the company not cut the consultant out of the loop somehow and get a few people trained by liaising with the person that consultant did? Then they write the procedure on the job like he did?
He sounds selfish and tbh his reputation will be trashed if he pisses all his potential new clients off like this.

MrsTerryPratchett · 24/10/2021 23:25

@Butchyrestingface

They haven't done it "for free" they're paid to do the job in which they developed the procedure on company time, on company resources after being sent in a training course the company paid for... What part of that is them doing it "for free?" confused

Were they paid to develop procedure though, as in, was it an expectation of the company that they would develop procedures and was that what the training was intended to teach them to do?

Or did this eager beaver go above and beyond the call of duty in doing so?

It doesn't matter. Wherever hired me, they did it because they believed I can bring my knowledge and expertise to the role. That's why they pay me. And if I do it in work time, with work resources, it's work. They own it.

It is strange in a new role to have to invent something new because your old materials are copyrighted to your old place of work but that's just how it is.

And I would walk over hot coals before I would hire back this chancer at inflated prices. And any reference would reflect the last 6 weeks.

Butchyrestingface · 24/10/2021 23:30

It doesn't matter. Wherever hired me, they did it because they believed I can bring my knowledge and expertise to the role. That's why they pay me. And if I do it in work time, with work resources, it's work. They own it.

I'm not saying that it DOES matter in a legal sense. But I'm asking the question to try and get a sense of where the person is coming from, even if they're completely wrong.