This mornings meeting
-
Albert Holguin wrote:
I'm not even sure why as American we always feel the need to give notice
Its called not burning bridges.
Albert Holguin wrote:
not sure if that's the norm in other countries
In my experience... it's pretty much the same (in the UK / Western Europe at least).
Contrary to popular belief, nobody owes you anything.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Its called not burning bridges.
Thanks Capt. Obvious. I meant why it's such a one-sided deal.
-
Here (France/Germany), it is the law.
Which part? Giving notice? ...does that apply to both parties (employee/employer)? ...because in the U.S. they'll just escort you out of the building the same day they told you a lot of times.
-
Albert Holguin wrote:
not sure if that's the norm in other countries
I worked as a contractor in the UK for many years and all of my contracts had a notice period built in (usually a month). If they wanted me out they could ask me to leave the premises immediately but would be contractually obligated to pay out the notice period. Similarly, if I gave notice I would have to be content to turn up every day for a month, if required (I did do that once and they asked me to leave immediately but still paid me out. Took a couple of weeks off and brought forward the start date of the next gig - tally-ho!). As a perm employee there are more protections in place but, certainly, the notion of at-will employment does not, afaik, exist in the UK any more, if you have been employed for more than a year or two. (Others may correct, confirm or add detail to that).
See that seems more fair to me... if one-side is bound by some obligation, the other side should be as well.
-
See that seems more fair to me... if one-side is bound by some obligation, the other side should be as well.
Indeed, plus there is also contractual reciprocity; what's good for the goose, etc. Courts in the UK take a dim view of one sided employment contracts.
-
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Its called not burning bridges.
Thanks Capt. Obvious. I meant why it's such a one-sided deal.
Albert Holguin wrote:
why it's such a one-sided deal.
It's pretty obvious... :rolleyes: 1. Employees sometime quit with no notice. 2. Employers sometimes pay severance or even help with employment services. 3. The risks of sabotage by "fired" employees hanging around for a couple weeks is substantial.
Contrary to popular belief, nobody owes you anything.
-
Indeed, plus there is also contractual reciprocity; what's good for the goose, etc. Courts in the UK take a dim view of one sided employment contracts.
Karel Čapek wrote:
Courts in the UK take a dim view of one sided employment contracts
In the US it seems to be the norm sadly.
-
I'm not even sure why as American we always feel the need to give notice (not sure if that's the norm in other countries). If the company was laying you off, they'd give you no notice most of the time.
I actually have had two jobs altogether and when I got laid off from the first job, they didn't give me a notice, but they paid me 2 weeks for each year I've had at that company plus the oustanding vacation, which was a nice lump sum (16 weeks or 4 months pay).
-
I actually have had two jobs altogether and when I got laid off from the first job, they didn't give me a notice, but they paid me 2 weeks for each year I've had at that company plus the oustanding vacation, which was a nice lump sum (16 weeks or 4 months pay).
Yeah, think that's pretty standard for salaried positions.
-
Which part? Giving notice? ...does that apply to both parties (employee/employer)? ...because in the U.S. they'll just escort you out of the building the same day they told you a lot of times.
Yes, both. For instance, I have to notice two months before I leave, my employer has to notify me six months before throwing me out. A former colleague of mine worked in an American company based in Germany, and they had to cut off some staff, so did exactly what you described and escorted a bunch of employees, including her, out of the building on the day of the notice. They probably did not realize that the law was a bit different here ! The former employees sued the company and they got quite a lot of money from that action !
-
Yes, both. For instance, I have to notice two months before I leave, my employer has to notify me six months before throwing me out. A former colleague of mine worked in an American company based in Germany, and they had to cut off some staff, so did exactly what you described and escorted a bunch of employees, including her, out of the building on the day of the notice. They probably did not realize that the law was a bit different here ! The former employees sued the company and they got quite a lot of money from that action !
That's actually pretty good... I'd think you'd want to give employees plenty of notice to find another job. Think it's paranoia that makes American employers do that, they think you'd sabotage something.