How has it gone this far? *Their*
Walk away, there are jobs, sounds like they need a company that a) doesn't expect 60 hours weeks and b) doesn't allow people on leave to join work calls c) has better line managers and better values!
Point one, business sounds a like a toxic place, time to get out but then again you may not be seeing the full picture.
Point two, You have very few employment rights up to 2 years (used to be 1 year), probation periods are not part of employment law. Normally internal polices apply during the first 2 years, such as termination policies, in reality though they are easy to work around and you'll get very little out of a tribunal.
Point three, sounds like a protected conversation was had even if it was not described as such, it is dodgy as F but perfectly legal. In theory it allows an employer to make an ex-gratia payment to make an employee go away without prejudicing future proceedings, can be appropriate and in the employees interest in certain circumstances. In practice they can often be used to threaten employees as happened in my case.
The key bit is the length of service, 3 months pay given the circumstances is pretty good, the employee doesn't really have any negotiating position. In my case I had 4 years service so had some rights and a good case of winning a tribunal, leaving the office in an ambulance due to a stress induced collapse in a meeting is pretty hard to refute, walked with 6 months in the end. Even then I was advised by an employment solicitor 6 months pay was realistic, 12 months probably wasn't In this case I think it's a clear take it or leave it. Refuse the offer and their normal policies will kick, it'll get nasty and the employee will walk with a lot less.
Unless the employee can find something from discrimination law then you have very few rights until you tick off 2 years service. This does sound like a standard settlement / compromise agreement. Unfortunately if a company really wants rid of you then it pretty much can if it follows this template.
Getting only one side of the story, but at face value, take the money and a reference and run, though I'd be tempted to negotiate upwards just to see how desperate and messed up they were.
But if there was any chance this is discrimination, I'd be dragging them to a tribunal, but I'm a stubborn old man who doesn't like bullies and/or bigots.
A compromise agreement like this is what my company uses rather than formal redundancy. It may not be 100% legal but if you fight it you’ll lose even if you win. I agree with everyone else who say take the money and run.
My wife has been through this sort of thing a couple of times. Both occasions the company itself was toxic. She challenged one and got a six month pay off to go. The other was full of in-bred family members, and you weren't going to get through that lot.
Thegeneralist- thank you so much, that advice could be very valuable. I will see what unfolds over the next few days and if they want me too i might take you up on the offer of getting in touch. Sounds like you had a very similar scenario.
Everyone, dont worry i think the days of working for that organisation are long gone for them. I just think its a bit raw right now and anger is doing a lot of talking/thinking. I certainly think they will try and extort every penny they can as being unemployed is not really an option.
Compromise /Settlement agreement. They have to pay (up to £500 I think)? for an employment solicitor- it's a requirement that you have independent legal advice. They've made an opening offer, solicitor should be able to try and negotiate a counter, maybe getting 6 months settlement ( + of course, notice period paid out). Also suggest you supply the text that the company will use to respond to any future reference requests, and ensure that's written into the agreement, for obvious reasons.
2) for this to be legal they have to tell you to get a solicitor to review it and provide a checkpoint. They will pay for that solicitor.
and
Compromise /Settlement agreement. They have to pay (up to £500 I think)? for an employment solicitor- it’s a requirement that you have independent legal advice. They’ve made an opening offer, solicitor should be able to try and negotiate a counter, maybe getting 6 months settlement ( + of course, notice period paid out).
You sure that is the case before 2 years?
Before 2 years they could pull you aside and say, sorry chum not more work for you and here is your contractual notice and it would be legit (aside from protected characteristics provably having been a factor in the termination).
I guess the employer is muddying the waters by going further than required of them.
Not sure who mentioned it but this person definitely doesnt have any form of personality trait that would grate on people. It sounds to me like only the manager has a problem and unfortunately she has been there a long time and thus carries clout with the bean counters. This person has brought a lot of staff with them so they work great as a team and have definitely upped the ratings of the hospital. I just get the impression that either their face doesnt fit or something else is going on and they need this person out of the way. The hospital is under review next month and 2 of their other sites have done very badly and i think they are panicking and decided the best course of action is to get rid of this person and claim it was down to them and thats why they had to do something about it. I think it gives them some leeway with the review, its shitty but it wouldnt surprise me.
Some useful info from Citizens Advice on a settlement agreement: https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/work/problems-at-work/making-a-settlement-agreement-with-your-employer/
One point the OP raised which stood out, was that if the individual didn't accept the offer the organisation would inform the governing body. This suggests either the individual has done something that may be considered wrong e.g. breaching British Medical Association regulations, otherwise such action would be libellous.
As mentioned by other posters you can only claim for Constructive Dismissal if you have been working for the employer for 2 years.
I would suggest getting an agreed reference as part of the settlement agreement.
One point the OP raised which stood out, was that if the individual didn’t accept the offer the organisation would inform the governing body. This suggests either the individual has done something that may be considered wrong e.g. breaching British Medical Association regulations, otherwise such action would be libellous.
Yes, overlooked that bit. Does the OP know what the employer would be informing this governing body about? Clearly no idea of the profession of the employee here, but I can't imagine many issues that would be reportable where it would be legitimate to negotiate the reporting. If it was reportable and you didn't by mutual consent with the 'offender' to ensure they go quietly that would be a serious black mark for the employer surely.
You sure that is the case before 2 years?
Before 2 years they could pull you aside and say, sorry chum not more work for you and here is your contractual notice and it would be legit (aside from protected characteristics provably having been a factor in the termination).
Good point. Not sure, tbh. The case I'm familiar with, the employment period was 6 months- this resulted in a 6 month payout + 3 months contractual notice.
Note: payout associated with the agreement isn't subject to tax below 30k, any portion attributed to pay in lieu of notice will be.
Philby - no breach of medical regs at all, i think what was said was that you either take the offer or we go down formal procedure and inform NMC as well. I am not sure what NMC does but the person told me they would be no help to them. I got the impression it was just a big bag of threats or take your notice period in pay and be quiet.
You sure that is the case before 2 years?
Before 2 years they could pull you aside and say, sorry chum not more work for you and here is your contractual notice
I think we're mixing stuff up here. You're quite correct that they could do that. They could do all sorts of things, some of which are open to challenge.
The SA is about avoiding the potential for that challenge.
I'm pretty sure an employer could offer an SA in the first week if they were daft enough to.
I was offered an SA less than 2 years. Although I think it was within my notice period of 2 years, which obviously makes it more complex.
Lots of talk about references but does the organisation even give references beyond the facts of 'yes this employee worked here doing x role between X and Y dates'. I find it pretty rare to get an emotive reference for people these days.
Apparently the offer is the notice period (3 months) and holiday owed so i guess subject to tax. Also there is a letter now in the post which they refused to show at the time so may be that will shed some light on it, not sure i will see that but you never know. It definitely sounds like a weird situation and this has all been done whilst they were on holiday which i guess is no coincidence. The more i think about it the more it sounds like the manager just doesnt like them for whatever reason. It will be interesting to see what happens to the staff that were brought in as they are all up for there 6 month probation meeting shortly. They have no idea that the person who brought them in is about to go.
On a hiding to nothing.
Less than 2 years service and they can just give notice without a reason.
Take the money and go.
AFAIK the 2 year rule only applies if they don't hold and employment contract that states a shorter probation period.
Personally, I'd speak to the solicitor, what's the harm? Make a decision based on the facts.
Sounds a weird place to work though.
Lots of talk about references but does the organisation even give references beyond the facts of ‘yes this employee worked here doing x role between X and Y dates’. I find it pretty rare to get an emotive reference for people these days.
Yeah, but it's removing the possibility of one being given.
Anyone saying anything other than take the money has never been in a situation where a Manager/Director wants rid of them.
Advise them to take the money and demand it paid ASAP in lieu of notice (as much tax free as possible) while they clear their desk.
You say the organisation is a hospital, and I would suggest NMC therefore stands for Nursing and Midwifery Council.
It sounds like there's all sorts of sh*tty behaviour happening at this medical establishment. Maybe your friend should think about whistleblowing to the appropriate bodies if this behaviour is prevalent - the news has recently featured the horrendous issues in Maternity departments of the Shrewsbury and Telford NHS Trust where people didn't report problems when they were arising.
Hope it all resolves itself.
Sounds like this person is better of out of there for many reasons, however is it possible the offer of 3 months money is negotiable? Probably. Providing they really have done nothing wrong I'd be checking up on the legality of the informal meeting with HR that should not be recorded or spoken of (very weird in itself), and the fact that they've been told they're not to talk to anyone about the offer made. Assuming this isn't legit, then let them know that and ask for 2 years money, negotiate down from there to potentially end up at 12 months (don't forget that's taxable).
Its very definitely shitty behaviour and very weird, they sound like a bunch of shithouses to me. I would not like to work there thats for sure.
I think a clarification as to whether this is a settlement agreement they are offering is the first order. Then a negotiation of said agreement and then get the hell out of dodge. I will also mention that they request a solicitor and that this would be at the expense of the company.
As much as i would like to tell them to threaten them with everything, i think it might be best to be cordial for the time being.
Solicitor should be paid for by the employer I got redundancy payout upped by 3k and 2extra month’s salary after refusing initial botched offer and them paying for solicitor (£500) Lol good luck to you friend sounds a shit place to be some of my initial discussions were “off the records” bastards
Apparently the offer is the notice period (3 months) and holiday owed so I guess subject to tax.
Change the SA so the offer is £xxx and makes no reference to notice periods.
I paid no tax on my SA
( other realities are available)
Anyone saying anything other than take the money has never been in a situation where a Manager/Director wants rid of them.
I pretty much agree, but do ask for more. Don't take their first 9ffer.
Definitely keep it civil, first because it's not worth the additional stress, second because somebody behaving firmly but rationally would be a greater concern to me than someone shouting the odds and making stupid demands.
Re tax, generalist makes a good point - maybe ask for net £x and let them worry about the bigger number to cover the tax.
The plot has slightly thickened. They have sent a settlement agreement which is what i previously stated and is valid till 14th March. The first paragraph states the reason as been the concerns they outlined in the probation period meeting which the manager then quashed the next day after she reflected on the reason and deemed it not valid.
Company procedure seems to stipulate that that meeting and its minutes/results have to be written up and sent to persons concerned. This was never an official meeting and was never written up, it was an informal chat between the director and my friend. Nothing written up at all about any concerns and my friend didnt even know those concerns even existed. They said they will provide legal assistance up to £250+VAT.
Solicitor should be paid for by the employer I got redundancy payout upped by 3k and 2extra month’s salary after refusing initial botched offer and them paying for solicitor (£500) Lol good luck to you friend sounds a shit place to be some of my initial discussions were “off the records” too bastards
legality of the informal meeting with HR that should not be recorded or spoken of
That's what I thought when it happened to me, I wanted to record the meeting on my phone. After taking legal advice and some Googling I roundabout it was a thing, had a row with TJ on here about it which to his credit he came back after some research confirmed what I had found out.
The 2 years thing is important as no solicitor is going into battle for that length of service and if they are the costs will be nuts, only exception is if they can prove discrimination. Constructive dismisal is hard to prove and has limited layouts. The employer contribution is to get a solicitor to sign off the compromise agreement, it isn't there for the solicitor to up the pay out. Cost me around £800 for my solicitor yo write a couple letters to bump up my pay out but then I had a half decent case, the HR team were rubbish and I knew I wasn't the first to out with an SA and 6 months plus notice.
Talking of TJ is he taking break? Surprised he's not all over this one.
Edit OPs latest update is consistent with a protected meeting and standard SA. Sounds like the employer knows what they are doing evenn if it is shitty.
AFAIK the 2 year rule only applies if they don’t hold and employment contract that states a shorter probation period.
wrong - probation period is largely irrelevant here.
Apparently the offer is the notice period (3 months) and holiday owed so I guess subject to tax.
that doesn't seem like a settlement agreement then - that's just the notice they have to give you to terminate your contract! There's no suggestion that its gross misconduct so they are offering you the minimum your contract says. The only thing you might be getting is not expected to work the notice period - but be in no doubt they really don't want you to work your notice, firstly because they don't like you and secondly because when you are firing an employee the damage they can do in that time is huge, even if you were the most professional person in the world the reputation / morale damage would not make it worth it.
Take their £250 and go see a solicitor, that might not be enough, but you may have insurance to cover the rest? At the very least the solicitor will make sure the letter is better written than their HR processes seem to be!
If no better offer can be gain then take it and "off the record" find out what the issue is. If they refuse the evidence then once you have the cash spread the word through the other employees about the bad blood.
This happens all the time, as someone said up there, it's a settlement agreement and what your friend has had is a "without prejudice" conversation, which keeps it off record.
Only thing I'd be wary of is talking about it like this on a bike forum if they intend to accept it might find they're breaching the agreement. They should also have a solicitor check the agreement (they should offer to cover the cost).
Edit - just realised I've repeated a lot of what's already been said! They also sound like they don't really know what they're doing (the company).
The plot has slightly thickened.
Start documenting things, right now. Who what where when.
she doesnt hold the core values of the company
It could be an old fashioned personality conflict but the phraseology is wrong
It could be she has a protected characteristic that someone doesn't like
It could be that she has tripped over someone else's protected characteristic
I'd suggest she checks her social media presence for something that could have given offence, even seemingly innocuous stuff can be a trigger if someone is looking for it
“Pay me 6 months pay as well as owed holiday + give my next employer a neutral reference. I’ll sign a non-disclosure agreement and you’ll never see or hear from me again” would be my approach.
This^^^
Anyone saying anything other than take the money has never been in a situation where a Manager/Director wants rid of them.
Advise them to take the money and demand it paid ASAP in lieu of notice (as much tax free as possible) while they clear their desk.
And this^^^
Nothing tricky regarding this employment situation. Some people just don't get along well with each others. Take the money when you reach this point in the employment. Plenty of jobs out there and life is too short to dwell around if they don't like you. Negotiate for as much as you can and get out quick.
I'm probably reading more into this than there is, but I reckon the manager is worried that they have a subordinate that is doing (or having to do) way more work than others to produce the desired results. Maybe the delegation, leadership and management of the work being done isn't very good or fair?
So now they are using a wishy washy nebulous reason to move on this person who is doing a cracking job.
If I were the HR person from corporate I'd like to know why the manger wants rid of a worker who is producing the goods.
Its a pretty crappy situation but that is a pretty good deal. You could try and negotiate on the figure if you want but I wouldn't be fighting for the job. Take the money, have a bit of time off, start looking for a new job, or use it as an opportunity to do something else.
Not sure who mentioned it but this person definitely doesnt have any form of personality trait that would grate on people.
You absolutely, absolutely, utterly positive?
Had two guys that worked with me years ago. Both, in themselves, near perfect employees. No one else had anything bad to say about them. I used to socialize with both of them as well. Even at the same time on occasion, no issues there.
Put them on a team together at work, or even sit them within earshot of each other and there would be blood within 48 hours. Sit them at opposite ends of the same office, they'd even join the rest of the team for lunch.
I'm just amazed that there's still companies and employees who think that taking phone calls on holiday or working silly hours is somehow acceptable or a sign of something 'good'.
Not sure who mentioned it but this person definitely doesnt have any form of personality trait that would grate on people.
People who work 60 hours a week and pop into meetings when on holiday really irritate me.
Presenteeism doesn't mean they are a good worker. It just means they are trying to appear like a good worker without actually having to do good work.
Take the money and leave. There are still plenty of employers out there who think this kind of behaviour is a positive and will be delighted to have them.
Not sure who mentioned it but this person definitely doesnt have any form of personality trait that would grate on people.
You absolutely, absolutely, utterly positive?
Unless OP has managed the person in question, they really can't answer this definitively.
TBH i dial into meetings when i'm not at work.
But, several factors, a) it's a part of my contract, so i get paid for it, b) i usually don't do it, i get a colleague to cover, c) i have colleagues working on the west cost of the US so it's unavoidable unless i want to do all communication by email with a massive delay and d) if i don't entire projects get delayed.
I've actually been in one already this morning (day off today). And one last night (to the US).
60 hours a week can get bent though. If i get to 45 my boss tells me to get a grip and log off.
Just a quick update.
The person has lawyered up now and has put in a counter offer. The solicitor says there is a clear breach of company procedure in terms of no written summary of probation meeting/result. He will use this as leverage in the negotiation. He also says the agreement is badly worded and that the amounts offered are the bare minimum. Given the persons high status in the organisation he would have expected more just to get them to leave quietly. He said given the short period of employment it would be churlish to ask for too much so a sensible offer is being put forward.
Personally I’d value an assurance of a good reference
I see this a lot in these types of threads. A company giving the reference is liable for the contents of that reference and could be sued by another company if they were inaccurate.
As a result nearly all companies will only give bare facts references. E.g. "X was employed here between y and z and performed the role of sales manager."
No (well advised) company is going to say "X was a great member of staff and really productive, we're sorry to see them go". Particularly if they are not
