Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To need HR advice?

66 replies

justcantchoose · 14/10/2022 19:14

If a number of people resign from a company because of poor pay compared to other companies (there's a 3 month notice period) and then head management contact 2 of the 5 employees before their notice period is over and offers them significantly more money to stay, but they don't offer the other 3 employees more money then is this legal/ok?

OP posts:
Original poster
justcantchoose · 14/10/2022 19:17

All 5 staff members have been in the company for more than 2 years.

OP posts:
Ledwood85 · 14/10/2022 19:19

Of course it's ok. Why would it not be?

SandyY2K · 14/10/2022 19:19

It's not illegal, but I see how it could raise some eyebrows.
I suspect that the company is fine with the other 3 leaving and values the other 2 more.

At the end of the day, they all resigned.

If I was dealing with this, I'd be looking at a creative way to keep the 2 they want to keep, while covering the organisations back.

PilchardsonToast · 14/10/2022 19:20

It's disappointing as they clearly now acknowledge that the pay was an issue but on the basis that everyone resigned of their own accord without pressure (did they?) had there is no suggestion that there was anything going in behind the scenes in advance with the other two i can't see how the other person could could make any legitimate claim.

If it's you, you could ask why you weren't offered a pay increase to stay and decide based on the response and whether there are any protected characteristics which differentiate you from the other two if you think there is something more to it..

Source- I'm Head of HR for a plc

Original poster
justcantchoose · 14/10/2022 19:21

You can probably tell that I'm one of the 3 that wasn't offered more. The 2 being kept are much younger, with no children. The 3 not being offered more are older with kids. It just doesn't sit right with me.

OP posts:
PilchardsonToast · 14/10/2022 19:22

This reply has been withdrawn

Withdrawn at poster's request

Original poster
justcantchoose · 14/10/2022 19:22

For more context another business has opened in the same area, doing the same thing, but paying much more.
Hence 5 resigning.

OP posts:
Fleur405 · 14/10/2022 19:22

I’m a lawyer though not an employment lawyer. Seems to me that unless there is some element of unlawful discrimination I.e 3 of the 5 were female and only the 2 male got increased offers then this is perfectly legal.

FatAgainItsLettuceTime · 14/10/2022 19:22

Is it also possible that the 2 with offers would be harder to replace, have specific specialist knowledge or have demonstrated better performance?

Oysterbabe · 14/10/2022 19:23

Yes it's fine, nothing to stop them doing this. There's obviously something about the 2 that they particularly want to keep.

lanthanum · 14/10/2022 19:24

I can't see anything illegal. They've decided they're going to have to offer more money, because they don't want to lose everyone (and if the going rate is higher, replacing them will probably mean paying more).
All five have resigned, so they don't owe any of them anything; they've presumably picked the ones they can least afford to lose, or whose productivity they rate most.
They might not be able to afford to offer everyone the higher rate - they might have to offset the higher salaries for those two by employing less experienced people to replace those that are leaving.

Original poster
justcantchoose · 14/10/2022 19:24

Also doesn't sit right that the big managers used to come and fawn over the younger workers. The ones not offered more money were significantly more experienced and performed better than the ones asked to stay.

OP posts:
Thisismynamenow · 14/10/2022 19:27

justcantchoose · 14/10/2022 19:24

Also doesn't sit right that the big managers used to come and fawn over the younger workers. The ones not offered more money were significantly more experienced and performed better than the ones asked to stay.

We're the 3 not asked to stay employed much longer and therefore liable for a much larger redundancy package? Perhaps the business isn't as good as you think and they saw this as a good opportunity to shift some of the redundancy costs?

Ekátn · 14/10/2022 19:27

justcantchoose · 14/10/2022 19:24

Also doesn't sit right that the big managers used to come and fawn over the younger workers. The ones not offered more money were significantly more experienced and performed better than the ones asked to stay.

You wanted to leave so is it bothering you?

Sometimes some staff are worth attempting to retain. Sometimes not and that is usually a matter of opinion. You handed your notice in. They have no obligation to try and stop you.

It sounds like you are very unhappy their anyway.

Ledwood85 · 14/10/2022 19:28

If you're a business and people leave due to low pay, what are you going to do? The correct thing, and the expected thing, is to right the wrong and listen to the message you've been told - in this case salvage at least two employees and give them what they wanted.

As a PP mentioned, everyone resigned. It may not sit right with you from the perceived age discrimination angle - it could well be that, or just the others were better at the job, or they've chosen the younger ones as they hope to recoup the money offered with smaller raises going forward over a longer time period. Could be anything.

End of the way, you lost your leverage when you resigned. I'd imagine if only four resigned and you were the last one standing - you may have had a good shot at asking for a raise without needing to quit. Sorry.

PoundOfNesh · 14/10/2022 19:28

Of course it’s ok

Maybe they didn’t offer you more to stay as you’re clearly not on the ball

Ledwood85 · 14/10/2022 19:28

End of the day, even.

Original poster
justcantchoose · 14/10/2022 19:28

Not likely to be any redundancies happening. Business is booming. I suppose I'm just annoyed, as if I'd been offered more money I would have stayed.

OP posts:
Original poster
justcantchoose · 14/10/2022 19:29

I've got pension built up, extra holiday days for long service, money in shares and saving schemes. So I lose all of that too.

OP posts:
Idontgiveagriffindamn · 14/10/2022 19:31

justcantchoose · 14/10/2022 19:29

I've got pension built up, extra holiday days for long service, money in shares and saving schemes. So I lose all of that too.

Yes you will but you chose to resign. Did you ask for a pay rise before resigning?

NoSquirrels · 14/10/2022 19:31

justcantchoose · 14/10/2022 19:28

Not likely to be any redundancies happening. Business is booming. I suppose I'm just annoyed, as if I'd been offered more money I would have stayed.

Why? From everything you’ve said it’s a shit company with poor management that doesn’t value its employees.

Sounds like you’re well out of it.

Original poster
justcantchoose · 14/10/2022 19:31

Before we all resigned we were told pay was fixed as a company and couldn't be increased.

OP posts:
Ledwood85 · 14/10/2022 19:32

justcantchoose · 14/10/2022 19:29

I've got pension built up, extra holiday days for long service, money in shares and saving schemes. So I lose all of that too.

Surely you took all this into consideration before you resigned?

Were you at peace with your decision before you subsequently found out if you played your hand better, you could have had your cake AND eaten it?

Sounds like a lesson learned.

PorkPieAndAPickledOnion · 14/10/2022 19:32

You’ve resigned because you’ve already secured one of those better paid jobs with the competitor, right? So why does it matter?

Or did you just take a gamble and use your resignation as a lever to try to get more pay? If so, it was a big risk but you must always have known it might not pay off.

Either way, it was your choice to resign, and you’ve done so. Time to start looking forward, not back.

Quveas · 14/10/2022 19:33

So another business opened nearby offering more money. Five of you, instead of applying for jobs there or somewhere else, decided to coincidentally resign at the same time? I think that sums it up?

You expected your employer to panic and offer you all more money to stay? You expected your colleagues to stick with you, one for all and all for one?

Don't play poker. You aren't very good at it.