Employer shortened my given notice - do I have redress?

[Earlynotice]

I’ve name changed as this could be outing for people that know the situation.

I gave notice to my employer beyond my contractual requirement, thinking it was the morally right thing to do. I was still on maternity leave at the time.

My employer accepted my notice, but said they don’t usually accept longer than contractual notice. Therefore, they worked out my holiday entitlement accrued during maternity leave, took me off maternity leave early and told me to use my accrued holiday which takes me to the end of my contractual notice period.

Off the back of another mumsnet thread I saw tonight and a quick read of citizens advice, it appears that this is tantamount to them sacking me?

If I had known that they aren’t meant to have shortened my given notice, I would have pushed back as I am happy to work to my given notice end date and I know that there is plenty of work for me to do.

Their reasoning for shortening my notice period was that it would be disruptive for me to return for a few weeks and then use up my accrued annual leave.

I also feel that if I hadn’t been on maternity leave then they probably would have let me stay longer. I know other people that have left that have a similar length of service that have had longer notice periods accepted (although they may have had different contractual requirements than me).

Essentially, what I am asking is does this amount to unfair dismissal on the grounds of possible maternity discrimination?

By them shortening my maternity leave and my given notice I lose one months pay and all my company benefits. From my quick bit of reading, if they didn’t want me back, surely the correct thing to do would be to place me on gardening leave?

Many thanks for any advice given. If it appears that there may be a case I’ll contact ACAS for further advice and go from there.

Most likely yes, it is. What are the timescales involved, and does it affect you having to pay back your maternity pay?

You should be paid for the accrued leave on the final salary slip, so your losses are the weeks you would actually be working and any payback of your maternity pay. I'd put this to them and ask to be paid for those weeks and see how they respond? A tribunal would start with these figures, so it wouldn't be a huge payout.

Thanks, my maternity leave was cut short by 2 weeks so no money gained or lost as I was on statutory throughout.

If they hadn’t shortened my mat leave, it would work out about just short of 1 months pay that I have missed out on, so a couple of thousand pounds and obviously my pension contributions, private medical (which I am currently using),and company life insurance policies cease at the reduced notice date.

Not huge money and not worth going to tribunal over, but it’s more the principle of the matter!

You gave notice and they've stuck to their contractual notice period. They've done this by the book. If you didn't want your end date to be so early then you should have waited to give notice.

Apologies if I've misunderstood? But long story short, once you give notice they have no obligation to keep you beyond your contracted notice period even if you're on maternity leave.

Although they do owe you any SMP that's outstanding, I wasn't sure from your post whether they've paid you all of this or not.

Thanks @Polpette I was under that impression previously, which is why I didn’t fight the change in date. It was another thread on here that lead me to this www.citizensadvice.org.uk/work/leaving-a-job/resigning/your-notice-period-when-resigning/ which seems to suggest otherwise, but I take your points on board.

Have they given you a shorter notice period than your contractual notice period? And is your contractual notice period the same or longer than the legal requirements?

I think I misunderstood your post, I thought you'd chosen your own end date that was later than your contractual notice. You don't get to decide your last day. Once you give notice the employer does not have to give you longer than your contract notice.

If they've shortened your notice to less than contractual then you absolutely have rights.

As per what you've posted it's only if they shorten your contractual notice that it counts as sacking. I can see how that can be misread but when they say earlier they mean earlier than your contracted notice.

"You can give more notice than your contract says, if you want - your employer can’t make you leave earlier. If they do make you leave earlier, this counts as sacking you."

The OP is after legal advice, not your guesses. If you give more notice than is required by your contract, your employer cannot make you leave earlier than your chosen end date. If they do, you may have a claim for unfair dismissal.

@Earlynotice Please ignore Polpette who clearly does not know the law in this area. You are correct. And @Magnanimouse is also correct that you may well have a case for discrimination.

Definitely know the law in this area having just been through a similar situation. However, would always advise anyone on the internet to get proper advice on the matter from a professional IRL.

If they've shortened the notice period I assume you're missing out on some leave you would be accruing during that time?

@prh47bridge you say "The OP is after legal advice" and if Mumsnet were a firm of solicitors then you'd be within your right to berate me. However it is not.

Surely you are entitled to your contractual notice period, not more than this. Otherwise what's to stop someone saying they are leaving in a years time, and then claiming they've been sacked when their employer wants to stick to the contractual 3 months (for example)?

They've given you your contractual notice period so have done nothing wrong.

Isn't the point that you discuss it if the notice period isn't suitable for one party, though? Most contracts say you need to give a minimum amount of notice, don't they?

My colleague recently retired. We have a 3 month notice period but she had to give 6 months to receive all the associated benefits.

Oh and to add, they've not sacked you, you've resigned.

That's not true. An employer cannot serve notice on you unless they have a legally fair reason to dismiss you. There is nothing in law that says an employee cannot give more notice than required, only that they cannot unilaterally give less notice than required.

The employer here has been an idiot, because not only have they dismissed the employee for no good cause, they appear to have said that they did so because they were on maternity leave when they handed in their notice. That is sex discrimination and maternity discrimination. Oh dear, I can see this costing them more than the months wages they thought they were saving....

Thanks to everyone that has contributed, I will of course be seeking real life advice (I know people in HR that I can talk to but didn’t think they’d appreciate being woken when this popped into my head at 5am!)

I posted on the legal board in the hope that I could get a feel for the law surrounding this area. I have legal training so can get my head round case law if you’re happy to share the cases that back up your points @Polpette? Sorry to hear you’ve been through similar.

I think it sounds like a bit of a grey area and would depend on the facts surrounding the resignation/termination.

On the face of it I gave longer than my contracted minimum notice period. They cut this down to my contracted notice period, which citizens advice suggests they cannot do without mutual agreement, at which point it technically becomes a termination rather than resignation, if I have understood correctly.

If it does count as a termination, they are on shaky ground as they technically should have followed their termination procedure? Add in the fact others in my firm with similar lengths of service have (potentially -I’m not privy to their contracts) worked for longer than their contractual notice, means that HR sticking to my contractual notice may boarder on the edge of maternity discrimination.

They have. They absolutely have. The employer can only give notice if they have cause to give notice. They don't have a legal cause to give notice so they have acted unlawfully. Employers can't give out contractual notice when they feel like it just because it is convenient to them. The OP giving more notice than required by their contract is an irrelevancy - that is allowed!

I'd give Pregnant Then Screwed a call

OP - you are correct. Ignore the advice here and get proper advice. The majority of what you are being told here is not legal advice, it's opinion and it is wrong.

There are people on here who know what they are actually talking about though. Prh47bridge in particular (I believe they ARE a solicitor or similar?) 😬

Op you are correct, they cannot reduce the notice you have given. They are on very shaky ground. Id call acas to start the ball rolling but they will probably advise you ask them to confirm THEY have terminated your employment as a starting point.

The danger of posting on an open forum!

I’ll speak to my HR friend and give pregnant then screwed a call.

Thank you everyone for your contributions. I’ll feed back anything I’m told in the hope that it may help anyone else stumbling across this thread in a similar situation - although as with anything legal there will be nuances that mean the same advice may not be relevant.

Honestly I don't understand why you would want to draw this on yourself with solicitors etc for what amounts to a difference of one month. You clearly wanted to leave and will I assume need a reference etc at some point. You are very naive if you think that this sort of litigation won't damage your future prospects .
I totally get it's annoying that they've held you to your contractual notice when you would have preferred to finish a month later but I think it's unlikely you'll get gardening leave. Even if you pursue this the most likely income is they will reinstate your date and you'll have to work an additional month complete with all the awkwardness that would bring.

I'm basing all of the above on the concept that as you are leaving work by choice , a month extra income isn't a deal breaker for you .

I see people are piling in with incorrect advice. This is not helping the OP who is after accurate legal advice.

Otherwise what's to stop someone saying they are leaving in a years time, and then claiming they've been sacked when their employer wants to stick to the contractual 3 months (for example)?

Nothing. If you tell your employer you are leaving in a year's time, you are leaving in a year's time. If your employer wants you to leave 3 months after you told them, they will have to dismiss you and potentially face a claim for unfair dismissal.

They've given you your contractual notice period so have done nothing wrong.
Oh and to add, they've not sacked you, you've resigned.

Wrong. The notice set out in your employment contract is the minimum you must give. You can give more if you want. Your employer cannot then force you to leave after the notice period stated in the contract. If they do, they have sacked you. That is the OP's situation.

OP you need to ask yourself what you hope to achieve by pursuing this.

The reality is that you’re leaving the company, it’s just that you want to do it on your terms not theirs. Given you gave notice your intention to leave has been made clear. The employer have stipulated that the notice given is longer than is contractually necessary and as such they have stated that you will be required to work only your contracted notice period.

Even though it’s technically shaky ground, it absolutely is not a sacking, because you resigned.

But you have literally nothing to gain by pursuing this. Taking an employer to a tribunal is going to affect you adversely. It will take years for a start, and in the meantime you are hoping for a reference from these people.

if you didn’t want to be out of pocket you should have gone back after your mat leave and then resigned. As things stand your employer could request you repay any maternity pay and your giving longer notice could be seen as a way to avoid doing that.

you need to let it go.