New employee - got lied to in interview

[msagile2605]

I got lied to about flexible working in my new job during the interview.

On my 3day in the job i thought I would try having a decent chat with my manager, but it was pointless as he was unhelpful and abrupt.

In the interview, they said it was one day on site, and it might sometimes be two days. I was okay with that. When I started a week ago, I was told that has now changed, and I need to be on site three days a week.

My question is that I physically, mentally, and emotionally can't do three days with a 4-hour commute both ways. I haven't signed the contract which says 8 weeks' notice. Suppose I want to leave, will I have to stay 8 weeks? And if they insist I stay 8 weeks, will they force me to do the 3 days in the office? I can only do one day commute at a push, alternating with 2 days.

I have had to think thru this and i dont think i want to raise grievance as this people are liers plus it going to ruin my relationship with them

Please help.

I also didn't have a contract. When you accept the job, that's acknowledgement that you've accepted everything. There is nothing in the job offer that specifies what days I'll be working on-site etc.

They struggled to recruit the the role and it was advertised three times. I'd applied before, and withdrawn as it was too far etc., but they came back and asked what my reservations were - hence where the 2 day on-site offer came in.

Employers should be penalised for messing people around like this. Like a few others on here, the 2 day on-site was detrimental to my acceptance of the role.

I can't afford to leave either. I'm the only adult in the house and the only earner. Due to divorce costs, I need a decent salary too.

They struggled to recruit the the role and it was advertised three times.

@KevinCostnerStoleMyHeart do they understand that 3 days on site is the deal breaker for you and you're now looking for another job? They're going to be back where they started in term of recruitment. I wonder if their attitude will change when you hand in your notice?

There are several exclusions from the two year rule.

www.davidsonmorris.com/dismissing-an-employee-with-less-than-2-years-service/

No, she hasn't, though the longer she works there without objecting to the terms the more likely she will be deemed to have accepted them. OP needs to make clear to them that she does not accept the terms of contract which differ from those referred to in the interview, which she made clear were of the essence to her, and induced her to accept the role.

Well aware. The OP isn’t suggesting anything that would allow a claim before 2 years.

Isn't Labour going to change the silly 'two year' rule anyway so that people have the same protection from day one of employment?

Who knows? When has a party ever done what it said it would do?!

It wouldn’t be overnight if they did.

They have indeed said that they intend to change the rules so that employees are protected from unfair dismissal from day one. However, they have promised to consult with businesses on the practicalities of implementing this and other changes. I am sure businesses will point out that they will be a lot less keen to hire people if this change is introduced.

The qualifying period has been changed several times since the Conservatives introduced legislation protecting employees from unfair dismissal in 1971. It has never been higher than 2 years nor lower than 6 months.

Not entirely sure how this is relevant since it does not appear OP is being dismissed and I don't think she has a case for constructive dismissal.