Employer refusing notice

[Jewlry]

I handed my notice in on 2nd October with immediate effect due to health reasons. I'd been on long term sick leave (work related) for a while and for me to give the required 4 weeks notice would only have been me remaining on sick leave for another 4 weeks anyway. Employer has now written to me to say that I have to give 4 weeks notice and therefore my last day with them will be on 30th October even though I've already started a new job! Don't understand this at all!

scottish they can't refuse to accept it. That is slavery. The OP has resigned in response to her employer's breach of contract. She is no longer their employee.

I wonder if OP's original employer is trying to hold her to the 4 week notice as a warning to others, to prevent them walking off the job?

Possibly Ifailed, or they're confused about what they have to do, or the OP hasn't been clear in her communication with them, or they're really p'd off or worried and being deliberately heavy handed in the hope the OP won't go to tribunal. All sorts of possible reasons but generally, as demonstrated by this thread, people think they know the legal position when they don't really.

Ifailed... possibly. There's been a lot of staff leaving and a lot of long term sick leave and vacant posts not covered

First of all, the majority of the other posters legally are correct, but I understand why you are frustrated. If you remain unfit for job 1, just explain to your doctor that they require a sick note for the 4 weeks notice period and there should be no issue.

OP I'm not saying that I think what you're doing is right. I clearly don't know all of the facts of your case in relation to the potential constructive dismissal claim but in general terms, the fact that you've gone from being unable to work at all to finding and starting a new job does make it sound like you've been less than a model employee.

It may of course be that the new job bears no resemblance at all to the old job - legally it is perfectly possible to be incapable of doing one job but able to do another.

MummytoCSJH you're wrong

OP DO NOT submit a fit note. Then you're accepting that you're still employed.

You've said you don't want a penny but also that job 1 are keeping you on full pay until the end of your notice period. If this is the case you may have some tax ramifications given you have 2 jobs in this period.

Also how have the first job breached their contract? They're required to make reasonable adjustments IF op's illness is disability related and yes, good prescribe would be to see what they can do even if it isn't but given we don't know the details of either job and what adjustments would be reasonable I not think we can say job 1 are in breach of contract so constructive dismissal claims are a bit premature.

The original employer cannot force the OP to work her notice.

If the employer has committed a fundamental breach of contract the OP is indeed entitled to resign without notice. If this were to end up in court the OP may win on that basis although I wouldn't like to say that for sure on the basis of the information on this thread - apart from anything else, we only have the OP's view of the situation.

If the courts were to find that there was no fundamental breach of contract by the employer they may be able to claim damages from the OP for any additional costs they have incurred as a result of her failure to serve her notice. Very few employers actually go down this route and they rarely win. However, they do win sometimes.

The chances are that the employer in this case won't take any further action and, apart from the fact she is unlikely to get a reference from this employer if she ever needs one, the OP will be fine. But it is possible this could turn out differently.

Nobody is saying the OP would be successful with a constructive dismissal claim. We don't know what the employer has or has not done. We don't even know whether the employee has the relevant qualifying service.

What I am saying is that the OP has left with immediate effect and communicated that fact and that the employment has therefore terminated. And that resigning with immediate effect without notice is a necessary step in most constructive dismissal claims. An employer cannot continue the employment relationship without the employee's consent or force the employee to remain or refuse to accept the resignation or anything like that.

Cross posted prh

Highly amused here at the OP's outrage at my supposed patronising post.
Dozens of people (some of whom are highly qualified in this field) said exactly the same and she merrily barged on, ignoring their advice. I put a few full stops in the same advice and she shrieks in fury. But at least she noticed the content.

Bet this company are gutted about the resignation.

As a solicitor specialising in employment tribunals and disputes, I can confidently say that yes, they can prosecute you

Oh dear.

Are you really a solicitor? In the UK? Employment law is a civil matter. You don't prosecute people.

Tell me what crime would I be prosecuted for?

"That is slavery."

No. It really isnt. Its a contract of employment. Payment for services rendered, subject to notice on either side. OP breached that. They cant do much about it (like sending slave catchers to round her up) but do have options such as claiming damages or even (and this is unlikely in this case) seek an injunction to prevent OP from working with someone else. Just because a person walks out it does not mean they are free of consequences.

I think op, I’d be asking what you think the chances of damage to your reputation are? And what you think each employer is likely to do.

Is this an industry that you have a chance of seeing people from the old industry in?
Do you think it could cause issues in the future with your current employer?

Can you go back to your current employer and ask HR to put in writing what they said about resigning immediately?
Do you think current employer is going to take this further or are they just making sure the forms are obeyed?

In the industry I work in his would be a big deal, because we sign non disclosure agreements. We also have clauses about working for competitors and we have very long notice periods. Mine is a shorter one at three months, but I know business-critical roles are on six.

Lots will depend on the industry, on any intellectual property or confidential info you’re party to, and lots will depend on the individuals you’re dealing with. This is the kind of thing someone could either let go or pursue rabidly depending on how they are.

What I didn't understand was why employer would prefer to insist on having me at home on sick leave on full pay for a further month rsther than accept immediate resignation.
I do think they are worried 're a grievance and trying to cover themselves now

Speculating here, but possibilities. (Which could be combined).

You're not fit for your normal duties, but if you'd given normal notice they could have asked you to help train your successor. Even if that just involves you answering emails or having a phone call.

HR is beurocratic and wants to do things by the book.

Like Cauliflower said, they don't want it setting an example to other employees that insta-quit is OK.

Ok so update.... old employer today has wished me well in new job, have advised I can contact them in future if I want to come back. And they've sent me a great reference. And are not pursuing the required notice. As I've now resigned they are going to advertise my post.
The letter sent was apparently standard but given the issues and circumstances they are in agreement with my original resignation.

So much for the scare mongering posters advising I could be prosecuted. For what crime hasn't yet been clarified of course

So much for the scare mongering posters advising I could be prosecuted. For what crime hasn't yet been clarified of course

Prosecuted is the wrong word. They could have perused you however for breach of contract.

Posters on this thread told me I could be prosecuted.
Yes they were wrong.

Posters on this thread told me I could be prosecuted.
Yes they were wrong.

Yes. You could however still have ended up in court.

Glad it's sorted.

Certainly witches on a civil matter yes.
Not prosecuted which a poster staying they were an employment said.

All's well that ends well then it would have been a civil case rather than criminal.

YOu need to negotiate leaving with immediate effect with emp 1. So far they have stuck to the standard 4 weeks notice. Just give them a ring, ask them if you can leave with effect of 2nd October as if you were to stay wld have to be on sick leave and better all round if call it a day etc. Usually employers do not insist on you working leave if asked nicely. If you think there will be issues mutter about constructive dismissal due to lack of adjustment int he work place following illness or as a result of illness/disability if that is appropriate