Notice Period Worked when it wasn't required to be

[RJH]

So, I currently work for a large, national waste management company, where I handed in my notice on 07/12/15. Today, after returning home from work I have received a letter from them dated 29/12/15 that stipulates that I do not need to work my notice. Pretty stupid considering I only have one day left there on the 4th January and I have to go back to hand back my laptop etc back.

Question is what can be done about this, as nobody has notified me before today, even though I handed my notice in on the 7th December! My fiancee was heavily pregnant during the period I seemingly haven't been required to work, giving birth on 22nd December, yet I've been working under the false pretence that I should have been there.

I've emailed the CEO and his assistant directly already about it.

See letter attached.

Thank you!

[Openlaw15]

Re: Notice Period Worked when it wasn't required to be

You should have been told that you were not required to work your notice in advance. They're saying you were being paid through the entire notice period. You gave your notice 7 December 2015, but how long is the notice required for your job?

What is your entire loss in £ ie the work periods you worked but seemingly didn't need to?

[RJH]

Re: Notice Period Worked when it wasn't required to be

You should have been told that you were not required to work your notice in advance. They're saying you were being paid through the entire notice period. You gave your notice 7 December 2015, but how long is the notice required for your job?

What is your entire loss in £ ie the work periods you worked but seemingly didn't need to?

[MENTION=77627]Openlaw15[/MENTION]

The notice period is 4 weeks so the dates are correct, but I've been made to go to work due to never being notified until today that I didn't need to be there at all since December 7th

Also, when you say loss I have none as I'll be paid up to the correct date, it's just the 4 weeks I've worked when I've now found out I didn't or shouldn't have been there....

[Openlaw15]

Re: Notice Period Worked when it wasn't required to be

You should either be paid for your losses or take them to a tribunal/ court for losses.

Do any other employees know that such notices are the norm for your company? It's definitely a matter for complaint especially the fact your partner was heavily pregnant and you would have been there with her except for the company's omission with respect to the 'no need to working notice.'

[RJH]

Re: Notice Period Worked when it wasn't required to be

[MENTION=77627]Openlaw15[/MENTION]

Not sure, as there aren't many people who have handed their notice in anytime recently.

What losses would I claim for, and what can I put in a letter/email communication to them?

I've already emailed the CEO to tell him of the situation, but with advice could add further?

[Openlaw15]

Re: Notice Period Worked when it wasn't required to be

Looking at it from an alternative position, where the situation had been different in that you had paid holidays but worked them, you'd have received days in lieu (ie days owed). You would have saved holidays therefore to use when you wanted them, or 8 hours normal pay plus 8 hours pay (for the lieu day) where you chose to work them. However, as the letter states, where employment ends you'll be paid anything the company owes you (ie unspent holidays) by a final payment.

So this is the essence of your argument to the CEO albeit in the current scenario. The days you had worked in your notice therefore should be paid as though they were lieu days as final payments from your company. If this doesn't happen, then you can either make claim to the tribunal or the County Court based on contract for the losses.

[RJH]

Re: Notice Period Worked when it wasn't required to be

[MENTION=77627]Openlaw15[/MENTION] could you put a draft together to get that point across please? It would be a big help!
I'll then send it to him ASAP

[Kati]

Re: Notice Period Worked when it wasn't required to be

could I suggest you wait to see if [MENTION=19071]teaboy2[/MENTION] [MENTION=26290]mariefab[/MENTION] or [MENTION=70489]judgemental24[/MENTION] have any extra advice [MENTION=59438]RJH[/MENTION]??

[ostell]

Re: Notice Period Worked when it wasn't required to be

@openlaw Please read the Original post. There has been no loss, he didn't need to work but there was a "misunderstanding". Stop trying to get people to got to ET when there is nothing to go to the ET about. He followed the terms of his contract but someone upstairs cocked up.

[Openlaw15]

Re: Notice Period Worked when it wasn't required to be

@Openlaw15 could you put a draft together to get that point across please? It would be a big help!
I'll then send it to him ASAP

I'll hold off until some other here may have different or better ideas , ie based on law etc.

[Openlaw15]

Re: Notice Period Worked when it wasn't required to be

@openlaw Please read the Original post. There has been no loss, he didn't need to work but there was a "misunderstanding". Stop trying to get people to got to ET when there is nothing to go to the ET about. He followed the terms of his contract but someone upstairs cocked up.

Ok, so who is responsible for that cock up and what, in your view, are the available remedies for the OP to compensate for that cock-up? Should the op just have to live with that although the loss to him is 4 weeks' wages? Or, should there be a remedy wherein the OP is paid the equivalent amount or damages (by way of contract) where that is not forthcoming?

[ostell]

Re: Notice Period Worked when it wasn't required to be

THERE IS NO LOSS !! He is getting paid, though it would have been nice to have had time off. There are no remedies, he followed the wording of his employment contract, and the employers have followed their part of it.

[des8]

Re: Notice Period Worked when it wasn't required to be

Can't see where the loss is.
OP was under contract of employment.
He was required by that contract to work up to 4th January.
The employer had intended to put him on gardening leave, but failed to notify him in time.
That doesn't mean they broke the contract.
ex facie there is no cause of action.

(See , others have had a classical education!!)

[mariefab]

Re: Notice Period Worked when it wasn't required to be

I agree with the cock-up theory. It could have gone something like this...
There's a policy that employees don't have to work during their notice period.
However, the person that you gave notice to didn't know this (and nor did you) so you worked it.
Around 29th Dec. the fact that you were leaving in a week was (finally) brought to the attention of the Employee Services Administrator who sent you that letter not knowing that you'd been working your notice.

You're justifiably annoyed but your notice period will be paid so I don't see a claim here.

[teaboy2]

Re: Notice Period Worked when it wasn't required to be

You will be paid for the period of the notice you worked and you should also be paid for the remainder of your notice that you are now not required to work (4th Jan 2016). So you won't actually suffer any loss, as the date of the letter makes it clear as to when they determined they no longer need you to work your notice. It should have been better worded "i.e. we no longer need you to work the remainder of your notice" whilst making clear what the date is for the last day they expect you in work.

I know its only 1 day but its still 1 days wages for not having to attend work! and at end of the day, you will still receive the same wage you would have received if you had worked the entire notice or not worked your notice (subject to their permission). So no loss at all, so you have no legal grounds to take tribunal action at all, unless they fail to pay you for the 4th Jan!