Employment law

[VLC86]

Any experts in the above?

 

In short there is a situation where someone I know is being made to go from a permanent contract to one that enforces 3 months off a year (with 1 months notice) and said change means a 75% reduction in income.

 

I suspect this is disputable and if they refuse they could claim for constructive dismissal. Is this correct?

[The Guvnor]

The easiest solution is to contact Acas

https://m.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=3977

[Vince Vega]

This might help:

 

https://beta.acas.org.uk/changing-an-employment-contract/when-changes-are-not-agreed

 

 

 

 

[Vince Vega]

ACAS East Mids - 0300 1231150

 

Talk to them.  V helpful and free.

[VLC86]

Said employer won’t entertain any conversations with ACAS. I suspect it becomes national news at some point soon  

[yorkie1999]

75% reduction in income?

[VLC86]

5 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

75% reduction in income?

Sorry, 25% reduction in income.

[yorkie1999]

53 minutes ago, Costock_Fox said:

Sorry, 25% reduction in income.

Tell them to ask for a 25% wage increase in compensation.

[VLC86]

1 hour ago, yorkie1999 said:

Tell them to ask for a 25% wage increase in compensation.

To cut a long story short, that’s pretty much what has driven this approach from the employer.

[Marmite]

He needs to check his contract that he signed with his employer when he started. 

 

Business's can change your hours or any part of your contract with an agreed period of notice that should be documented in your contract. 

 

For example our company changed some staffs working days. The staff that didn't want to change were told that they were being given 12 weeks notice

 

I think even if it doesn't state it in your contract, as long as a reasonable time frame is given then they are not doing anything wrong

[VLC86]

54 minutes ago, Marmite said:

He needs to check his contract that he signed with his employer when he started. 

 

Business's can change your hours or any part of your contract with an agreed period of notice that should be documented in your contract. 

 

For example our company changed some staffs working days. The staff that didn't want to change were told that they were being given 12 weeks notice

 

I think even if it doesn't state it in your contract, as long as a reasonable time frame is given then they are not doing anything wrong

Thanks, I’m not sure working hours is the same as cutting 25% off salary which makes me wonder how legal it is.

 

I’m sure they would need to give 3 months notice but there is a chance that this could be less than a month.

[Crinklyfox]

So the employer wants everyone to take three months off per year.  I don't expect that the amount of work that has to be done is going to drop so that means everyone who stays is going to be working harder for less reward.

 

I've seen this sort of thing happen before.  I used to work for a company with offices world-wide, and there was a small office of four people in one country where the country manager decided that he could save some money by cutting it down to three.  The result was the remaining staff were overworked and became disenchanted with the company.  within a year two had left and the last one was doing what he could including training new staff but they weren't as efficient as the experienced ones that had left and the office went downhill, they lost clients and income.

 

I reckon that anyone who can leave the company probably will.  Recruitment under those terms won't be attractive.

[VLC86]

On 11/10/2019 at 16:23, Crinklyfox said:

So the employer wants everyone to take three months off per year.  I don't expect that the amount of work that has to be done is going to drop so that means everyone who stays is going to be working harder for less reward.

 

I've seen this sort of thing happen before.  I used to work for a company with offices world-wide, and there was a small office of four people in one country where the country manager decided that he could save some money by cutting it down to three.  The result was the remaining staff were overworked and became disenchanted with the company.  within a year two had left and the last one was doing what he could including training new staff but they weren't as efficient as the experienced ones that had left and the office went downhill, they lost clients and income.

 

I reckon that anyone who can leave the company probably will.  Recruitment under those terms won't be attractive.

The staff will be asked to work more no doubt but legally their are many regulations in the industry that will prevent it.

 

Sadly, the employer knows that it can replace these workers with others that will take the job and then leave in a few years and I believe this is the companies way of getting rid of people who have been there for a while. 

[ozleicester]

Neo Capitalism huh