Jump to content

Recommended Posts

My cousin started work for a new branch of a large company and he is still in his probation period, everything started off well and the manager praise him etc..however business is not doing too well and they cut everyones hours, yesterday my cousin went into work, the first thing his manager told him was from today onward our company new rule is if you cant handle your workload without help of others then you need to write in to say that you wish to resign as the company will not fire you. To me,that was really harsh the fact that the company don't want to used him but make him say that he wants to leave..Should he go ahead and write the letter or should he make them give him a written notice to say why he should leave.

Many Thanks

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/23569-urgent-legal-advice/
Share on other sites

I would advise him not to resign.


That may affect his benefits ???


Let them fire him.


They will need to give a reason.


'Handle his workload without help of others' ??


If he is in a probation period, is he getting training ??


Does he have a contract laying out what is expected of him. ??


Tell him to hold on in there.


Fox.

Sounds like a case for constructive dismissal. You can't force people to resign, if they are not good enough they should go through formal disciplinary procedures and then be sacked.


It is difficult as he is probationary period so I believe they can get rid of him anyway without real reason.

There's a mix of issues here, but I agree that a union would in general help with legal enquiries.


However, in this case since he is still in his probation period, he almost definitely hasn't got a hope of retaining his job through legal activity. That doesn't mean he has to resign (and he shouldn't do so, because of the potential impact on his welfare options).


Even a union when faced with inevitable job cuts will opt for a 'LIFO' solution - last in first out. That means he'd be one of the first for the chop with or without a union.


I hope nobody thinks this is an 'us against the fat cats' scenario. It sounds to me that by cutting hours first, and only then looking at cutting headcount, this company is doing its best to keep as many people in employment as possible.


By the sounds of this, and the bollocks spoken by the 'manager' that his experience is more impacted by having an idiot boss talking bollocks rather than company policy.


Remember, no amount of union belligerence can save a business that is failing, they can only accellerate its demise.

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There's a mix of issues here, but I agree that a

> union would in general help with legal enquiries.

>

> However, in this case since he is still in his

> probation period, he almost definitely hasn't got

> a hope of retaining his job through legal

> activity. That doesn't mean he has to resign (and

> he shouldn't do so, because of the potential

> impact on his welfare options).

>

> Even a union when faced with inevitable job cuts

> will opt for a 'LIFO' solution - last in first

> out. That means he'd be one of the first for the

> chop with or without a union.

>

> I hope nobody thinks this is an 'us against the

> fat cats' scenario. It sounds to me that by

> cutting hours first, and only then looking at

> cutting headcount, this company is doing its best

> to keep as many people in employment as possible.

>

> By the sounds of this, and the bollocks spoken by

> the 'manager' that his experience is more impacted

> by having an idiot boss talking bollocks rather

> than company policy.

>

> Remember, no amount of union belligerence can save

> a business that is failing, they can only

> accellerate its demise.


What is this word 'accellerate', Hugo? Must be the Singapore spelling of accelerate.


Anyway, I'd put the ball in the manager's court by asking if the workload is reasonable based on the cousin's work experience and what steps he can take to improve his performance such as training and mentoring. Managers are obliged to use such remedies before dismissal and resignation becomes an issue. If the workload is unreasonable then it becomes possibly a Health and Safety matter. But as Hugo has pointed out his length of service is an undermining factor.


edited to remove 'would'.

Thank you all for your time and advice.I think my cousin is going to give in, he is going to leave his job as he is not a confrontation person and feels that he can't cope with the stress of all the hassles but I suggested to him that he should not write in to resign even if he decide to leave.Since the company don't want to give him anything in writing then nor should he. Agreed?

Rainbow,


It all depends on what is written on his contract of employment. If his contract says that he is required to give written notice in order to resign. Otherwise he would be in breach of contract.


The Jobcentre will disallow his contribution based JSA for up to 26 weeks unless he has just cause for leaving his last job. At the same time he could receive a reduce rate of income based JSA during the period of his disallowed contribution based JSA. The problem here is that the Jobcentre would expect your cousin to take reasonable steps to protect his employment such as seeking training, mentoring, etc. It's a difficult one as I understand how stressful the matter can be for your cousin.


If your cousin really can't face the confrontation then a written notice, with reasons for leaving, given to the employer.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Hi if anyone has one pm me cheers 
    • You can always check when they registered on the forum, if you are suspicious. But I recommended Aria, and it certainly wasn't my only post on here, and it was a genuine recommendation. ETA: And he didn't ask me to make it, to the best of my recollection. But even if he had, many local tradespeople ask people to post on here if they are happy with the work that has been done.
    • I am not a patient at this practice, but surely it is more sensible to have an initial  phone discussion, as often the GP wouldn't need to see someone face to face unless they actually needed to physically examine them? This then leaves the available face to face appointments for patients who need them. And if during  the phone call the GP felt you needed examining, then arrangements could be made for a face to face. If you feel your ailment is such that you will definitely need to be physically examined, can you not explain that to the receptionist?
    • Give Labour a chance, they've only been in government for a short time, and they inherited a mess! As regards the notice boards, to the best of my recollection they were originally intended as community notice boards, and certainly not for advertising local businesses (who would decide which businesses  should have the limited space on the boards, anyway?) East Dulwich may have become more gentrified since the boards were first introduced, but that surely doesn't mean they should now be completely  taken over for the benefit of  the "middle classes", to the exclusion of everybody else? As  NewWave says, surely these people have other ways to find out about groups and events of interest to them, which the "non middle classes" may not have access to, and even if they did may not be able to afford them. Several people including myself have complained to councillors about the state of the noticeboards in the past.  I think one of the issues is that they were originally maintained by local volunteers, who may have either moved out of the area or lost interest - or given up in despair when the boards were flypostered and/or vandalised. I completely  agree that the boards should be used for information about not for profit organisations in the area, but if regular maintenance can't be provided and/or they continue to be vandalised, then I think it would be better if they were removed altogether.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...