I m right to give him notice aren't I?

[Lilly11a]

I ve had someone employed since the new year for me .
Hours are 9-5.30pm with hour lunch - I m happy for people to go at 5 if work up to date .
I ve had issues with him with lateness and sickness which I had to give him a warning about at the beginning.
It has improved but he is still probably late once a week and sick a day a month ( which is now going through at ssp).
Work has picked up massively and I m having to do a lot of unpaid overtime to get something through, after which I do expect things will go back to normal.
He has had a bit more to do but has still been going at 5 - still fine with me if work is getting done .
I asked him to do something extra ,which he has done before , about 3.30pm that would have taken 10 mins .
He refused to do it and said his work load was too high .
After a 20 min somewhat circular conversation where I asked if his work load was high he wasn't staying till 530, it's that he doesn't like changing between tasks and the work can be done he just doesn't like doing it or the pace / the fact there is work all day .
It's also unfair that other people in different departments go earlier ( but anyone that works longer hours then him is nothing to do with him) and sitting at a desk 8 hours a day makes him ill.
After then discussing what happens if he gives notice and having a comment how can you monitor if I slack off - I ve had to say to him either give in your notice tomorrow or I ll give you notice.
I guess I m just frustrated that we almost seemed to be talking different languages and no doubt he would have gone home thinking how unfair it was .

He has been watching TikTok’s about good boundaries at work and not understanding what reasonable contracted work actually is which is understandable if he is late twenties and hasn’t worked previously.

@tenbob exacrly. Most office based jobs these days you are expected to be able to manage your workload yourself.

Our core hours are 10am - 4pm (that is when it is expected you are always available for meetings, calls etc..). Other than that people work the hours they need to get things done. I tend to start at 9 and work through to 5.30 - 7pm depending on how busy I am.

That said I would not concentrate overly on the finish time. The direct refusal to carry out reasonable request is the bigger issue - that is misconduct.

The issue of not being able to work a 7 hour day with "only" an hour lunch break at midday is also laughable in a healthy young person. It dosn't sound like a physical job.

You want him to work through his lunch and from 5-5.30 both unpaid?

Or have I understood incorrectly

Completely

Completely correct or completely misunderstood?!!!

Lunch breaks are unpaid in pretty much every job.

I think the 5.30pm is the standard leaving time. Their office hours are 9am - 5.30pm but the OP is happy for people to leave at 5pm if work for the day is up to date.

I assume it is annual salaried role not an hourly one so it doesn't really make much of a difference.

Completely misunderstood

Are there other things you could put in place?
He says he feels ill if he works too long without a break - so can he flexitime or have different hours with a break built in.
Or less hours.
Why does it make him feel ill? He doesn’t have to tell you but maybe there’s a way to change it up a bit.

Im not sure it’s fair anymore to penalise people for taking sick days.
If he’s telling you work makes him sick- it may or may not. He’s already penalised for it if it’s on SSP.

Why is he late 20s but first job? I know he doesn’t have to say but does that add in context?

He sounds a pain in the neck and you are right to get rid.

But you are creating problems for yourself with this whole 5/5.30 thing. Just make the official hours one or the other and stick to it.

He sounds lazy and entitled, I'd get rid. Personally I'd try to get someone older next time.

If he's too delicate to manage a full day's work then what he needs is a part time job somewhere else. Given what you've said about your firm's recent history you cannot afford passengers. Let him go

As he has been there less than 2 years and no protected characteristics then I'd give him 1 month notice to leave stating that his skill set does not match the requirements of the role therefore you are terminating his contract.

He sounds a pain in the arse.

Exactly my thoughts. It's not up to you to accommodate his requirements when his requirements are not to work a full day and not to do the tasks asked of him.

Also letting some staff finish at 5 and making others work until 5.30 is just going to start resentment within your team.

He's easy to get rid of at the moment, is a lazy git and like many just into the working world, an entitled arse.

I'd be giving him his marching orders today and telling him to consider it a free life lesson.

If you can legally fire him today then do it. The job doesn’t suit him. Personally I would go down the performance management route though and scrap the silly 5/5:30 rule. It will just end up with people not working for 10 hrs a month but getting paid for it. If they can leave early they don’t have enough work.

Less than 2 years service and persistently late it is totally fine to dismiss. Just call him in to a meeting and tell him you are letting him go with whatever notice is specified in his contract.

Why is this his first job at that age?

Since work isn't ever going to fit exactly into 37 or 40 or whatever hours a week , yes there are likely to be quiet times as well as busy times and saying people can leave at 5 if it's not busy is not exactly complicated

I would add I would prefer. 15 min morning break half hour lunch and 15 mins afternoon break

Omg
Get rid

Dismiss him today and start recruiting. Honestly, he's taking the piss and you're being too soft / kind. There would be plenty of people who'd like a job such as you described. Get the support you need, rather than sacrificing your time covering someone else's role because they are lazy and entitled.

Just wanted to check that he hasn't got any protected characteristics that he's declared, like being disabled?

Well if he doesn't want to work 1-5/5.30 straight through he should have been a grown up and asked if he could change his lunch break until 12.30/1pm for an hour.

Instead he's acting like an entitled immature arse who doesn't want to do the job he's employed to do.

So yes - he hands in notice because he doesn't want the job he's being paid to do or you give him notice.

if you're not happy with the quality of his work, his attitude, his lateness or repeated sickness (but don't you have to be careful there?) then get rid.

Are you a manager? Did you own the company? Because talk of working "overtime" by you is negated if you are either of those things. He is relatively new, and i guess relatively lowly. It is not in his interests to do extra. But i do agree he doesn't actually appear to be doing enough.

Are you very sure that he doesn't have some kind of protected characteristic though?