Given notice at work

[Forgotwhat]

My work has given me my notice - 3 months and I’ve been there under two years-so I don’t have a leg to stand on.

I don’t desperately need the money-can I just go? I don’t really want to carry on working for them for another 3 months to hand things tidily over to other team members etc.

Basically I have set up a department and way of working for them, and now mostly the grunt work is done they want stuff taken over by cheaper members of staff (basically I am redundant with no redundancy rights) it’s all fine, I just don’t really want to spend three months training people how to do my job and showing them the tricks of the trade when they’ve decided to end my employment.

can I just say that’s absolutely fine, I don’t need a notice and I am happy to forgo that and leave today? I know if I give notice I have to work it- but this is different the decision to go isn’t mine-so I don’t feel I need to honour it?

That was established about 100 posts earlier.

I was replying to your message where you talk rubbish about about her attendance records being ok and it having to be a redundancy situation. I’m well aware of the long list of auto unfair reasons (no evidence of this), unlawful discrimination (no evidence of this) and breach of contract (reasons irrelevant, what matters is if the contract is followed (both express and implied terms)). It is perfectly legal for the employer to one day decide that they don’t need a person anymore and give them notice, and if it is under the 2 years, there is little the employee can do about it.

Actually it’s not rubbish, I’ve been in this situation before and advice from ACAS included making sure that if dismissal was on grounds of attendance, conduct or performance, that any disciplinary or other procedures forming part of the contract of employment should be followed to avoid a claim of automatic unfair dismissal. And nowhere did I say that there was any evidence of that. Neither did I say that it had to be a redundancy situation - I said it appeared to be a redundancy situation in which her duties would be shared out among remaining staff.

Then ACAS (who are not legally trained and essentially just read from a script) gave you the wrong advice!

Any procedures which genuinely are contractual should be followed to avoid a wrongful dismissal claim - but it isn’t an automatically unfair dismissal if they just don’t bother, and the employee still has no unfair dismissal rights - only those rights that can be claimed as a breach of contract.

(Incidentally the OP wouldn’t be redundant in law if the job still exists, and the law does recognise an employee being dismissed for no reason - I’ve even seen that argument in an ET!)

It has been made clear that the OP has been made redundant. One can give terrible advice or argue about attendance or discrimination or whatever imaginary issue they want until they are blue in the face but that does not change the OP's situation.

The 2 years thing is ridiculously long, when most roles have 3 to 6 month probationary periods, and obviously was extended from 1 year for the benefit of employers, not employees

Indeed, it was about the first action of the Coalition government in 2010. Supposedly because the economy was weak and it would encourage more people to be taken on by employers.

Even a year is too long in my view.

You’ve basically taken what I said and nitpicked it. And I’m perfectly well aware that it’s the job that is redundant and not the person, but if the company restructures the role itself may no longer exist and the duties making up that role can be distributed among the remaining staff.

I agree.

That was too Lieselotte