Permanant Employee -

**LisaContractorUmbrella** · 10 July 2012, 14:32

IANAL but I would look at the 'reasonableness' of the situation - an employee who has handed in their notice has usually done so because they have some level of dissatisfaction with their job or their employer. If they are persuaded to stay with a financial incentive their dissatisfaction will not necessarily disappear - the company are making a financial investment in the employee and are protecting that investment by asking for a firm commitment to the company - I am not sure this would be viewed as unreasonable in a tribunal.

**Mister Clark** · 10 July 2012, 14:37

Originally posted by LisaContractorUmbrella View Post

IANAL but I would look at the 'reasonableness' of the situation - an employee who has handed in their notice has usually done so because they have some level of dissatisfaction with their job or their employer. If they are persuaded to stay with a financial incentive their dissatisfaction will not necessarily disappear - the company are making a financial investment in the employee and are protecting that investment by asking for a firm commitment to the company - I am not sure this would be viewed as unreasonable in a tribunal.

Interesting.

Would you be able offer an opinion as to what could happen if it went to a tribunal? I'm guessing compensation could become payable.

I should also mention that along with the pay rise she has been asked to fulfill additional tasks/resposabilities - I'm not sure if that adds a different slant on the situation.

**northernladuk** · 10 July 2012, 14:44

Money is a very poor motivator and only has a very short term impact for most professionals. In fact it is generally a demotivator and offering more just removes the demotivation rather than adding anything good. If she wants to go she should go IMO she could get the same money and a much more interesting job. There is also the kick in the balls that she was always worth that money and they have taken her for a ride in the role. Time to go I would say, but......

What is the penalty for not staying? I have had to sign something similar but it relates to cost of training that I have been given. The penalty was to pay the cost of the training back should I leave within 12 months. In once case I did and had to pay it. Saying that I savvy enough to fight it. The course got me the next gig so just wrote it off as an investment.

They can't just say you HAVE to stay, there has to be some penalty for if she doesn't. They can't force her to stay with no get out. No one can sign something like that and know they can honour it surely. I can't believe it is legal to tie someone to a job so the only option out is a tribunal.

Try and find out what they would consider suitable compensation so you can make a better decision. Is it to pay the extra she earned back for x months or something?

**LisaContractorUmbrella** · 10 July 2012, 15:08

Originally posted by Mister Clark View Post

Interesting.

Would you be able offer an opinion as to what could happen if it went to a tribunal? I'm guessing compensation could become payable.

I should also mention that along with the pay rise she has been asked to fulfill additional tasks/resposabilities - I'm not sure if that adds a different slant on the situation.

In reality it's unlikely to get before a tribunal - although I don't think the clause would be illegal I think it would be unlikely to be enforced in terms of legal action for breach of contract. The pay rise adds a different perspective entirely - the increase in salary is then not being paid as an incentive to stay with the company but as a raise commensurate with the additional responsibilities.

**BolshieBastard** · 10 July 2012, 15:09

Originally posted by Mister Clark View Post

MODS - Sorry, submitted too fast! Can you please change subject to: Permanant Employee - Restrictive Covenant?

Hi All,
Bit of an odd one, hoping someone can help me.
My partner decided to move companies due to salary demands and found a position paying better money elsewhere.
She handed in her notice at which point her boss asked her to stay and meet the salary being paid by the other company.

However, HR have asked her to sign a form (note, this is not an amendment to her contract) saying she will stay at the company for the next 12 months. She has no intention of leaving but does not want to sign the form.

I've advised he not to sign, however if she were to sign would it be legal?

12 months strikes me as excessive and my gut feel is it would not be enforceable due to restriction of trade and because it would not mirror the contents of her contract. It would make more sense to pay the extra salary as a bonus at the end of the 12 mths but this is not an option they are willing to consider.

Any thoughts welcomed.

Couple of options

stay, take the increase and sign
stay, take the increase but dont sign
Leave for other job.

Tend to agree with NLUK here, why has it taken a decision to quit to get additional money and more importantly, I presume the boss said no strings attached rather than I'll give you the same dosh but you have to sign a piece of paper saying you'll stay for 12 months? I've no doubt the workload will be increased as well if they are wanting a written committment to stay!

Personally, if she made a decision to quit, I think that's what you have to do as things start to get messy when these 'compromises' get bandied about.

I'd presume if she signed the committment to stay but walked, the employer could try and recoup it's losses ie training a replacement, etc.

**Mister Clark** · 10 July 2012, 15:24

From a motivation POV she loves working there but she aint earning contractor rates and is effectively earning less this year than last when inflation and other expenses (read train costs) are factored in.

However, I agree in general with the points raised and will pass along, I also said she should jack it in and leave.

Thanks for the comments.

**northernladuk** · 10 July 2012, 15:30

Originally posted by Mister Clark View Post

From a motivation POV she loves working there but she aint earning contractor rates and is effectively earning less this year than last when inflation and other expenses (read train costs) are factored in.

However, I agree in general with the points raised and will pass along, I also said she should jack it in and leave.

Thanks for the comments.

She is permie, she shouldn't be comparing contractor rates. That is a sure way to stay miserable.

**Mister Clark** · 10 July 2012, 16:07

Originally posted by northernladuk View Post

She is permie, she shouldn't be comparing contractor rates. That is a sure way to stay miserable.

She isn't; apologies my post was not very clear.

She loves where she works and isn't lacking motivation but her current level of salary before the pay rise means she cant afford to stay working there when inflation and train costs have risen but her salary has not - a few K more a year means she can.

**northernladuk** · 10 July 2012, 16:21

Originally posted by Mister Clark View Post

She isn't; apologies my post was not very clear.

She loves where she works and isn't lacking motivation but her current level of salary before the pay rise means she cant afford to stay working there when inflation and train costs have risen but her salary has not - a few K more a year means she can.

Really? a few K a year. 1K is approx £60 a month in hand. That much is the difference between being able to work there or not? If it is that tight she definately needs to move and get a career ladder else end up chasing the pennies for ever?

Anyway, that is your personal circumstances and choice so will leave that.

Permanant Employee -