Termination

[AtW]

It is to me.

Situation A) There is no work available due to the situation, i.e all permies off so don't come in, don't get paid.
Situation B) There is no work available i.e. project has finished so don't come, don't get paid.

Why is that different?

It's different because commercially you'd be agreeing not to enforce contract because you'd be staying on for much longer than 4 weeks notice you'd gain from enforcement. It's a smart move to act like this.

Project finished suddenly (before you had some time on it) means you may have suffered losses from rejecting other contract offers that would have lasted for longer, only MF can get new contract next day, so for most people 4 weeks notice is reasonable thing.

Bottom line is that whatever the contract says goes (unless the law says otherwise).

[northernladuk]

Bottom line is that whatever the contract says goes (unless the law says otherwise).

Absolutely.... but you don't have to be paid for it if you didn't work it in my mind.

We have had plenty of discussion on this and some do think you should be paid your notice even if you didn't work it. That then goes in to a discussions disguised employment and loads of examples about brickies etc.. The one thing we are missing is a professional opinion on this, both from contractual lawyers and IR35 specialists. Maybe CUK can take up the mantle and ask them to write an article on it.

[malvolio]

It's different because commercially you'd be agreeing not to enforce contract because you'd be staying on for much longer than 4 weeks notice you'd gain from enforcement. It's a smart move to act like this.

Project finished suddenly (before you had some time on it) means you may have suffered losses from rejecting other contract offers that would have lasted for longer, only MF can get new contract next day, so for most people 4 weeks notice is reasonable thing.

Bottom line is that whatever the contract says goes (unless the law says otherwise).

Sad, isn't it. Thirteen years education and people still don't understand the basics...

[AtW]

Sad, isn't it. Thirteen years education and people still don't understand the basics...

Please explain the basics to me and I'll vote for you to be Personality of the Year 2013

[AtW]

but you don't have to be paid for it if you didn't work it in my mind.

Your minds sounds like one of employee in disguise rather than of somebody who properly runs business.

It's common to have notice periods, just because your services are not used in this period does not mean you are not entitled to agreed payment (unless contract says otherwise, like say in cases of pay as you go services but that removes almost meaning from notice period).

When I sign up for BT line it comes with 12 months notice period, do you really think you can just terminate it 6 months later and not be liable for further 6 months just because you'd stop using it?!?!?!

[northernladuk]

Your minds sounds like one of employee in disguise rather than of somebody who properly runs business.

It's common to have notice periods, just because your services are not used in this period does not mean you are not entitled to agreed payment (unless contract says otherwise, like say in cases of pay as you go services but that removes almost meaning from notice period).

When I sign up for BT line it comes with 12 months notice period, do you really think you can just terminate it 6 months later and not be liable for further 6 months just because you'd stop using it?!?!?!

Indeed but unfortunately contracting is hardly about running a business nowadays. Just turning in to the defacto method for getting short term flexible resource in nowadays.

On the BT thing it is possible to terminate early with a small charge for it so you can get out when you are not using it. Their T&C's make this clear which ours don't so maybe the lesson here is to start insisting on termination fees to our clients... but as per my first sentence this just won't happen any more.

BT.com | Personal | Terms & Conditions

[AtW]

Indeed but unfortunately contracting is hardly about running a business nowadays. Just turning in to the defacto method for getting short term flexible resource in nowadays.

Then the contract should say 1 day notice period and it's ok.

If the contract says 4 weeks notice and it's not honoured then it's contract breach.

On the BT thing it is possible to terminate early with a small charge for it so you can get out when you are not using it. Their T&C's make this clear which ours don't so maybe the lesson here is to start insisting on termination fees to our clients... but as per my first sentence this just won't happen any more.

Sure, there is "early termination charge." whilst the contract is for 12, 18 or 24 months.

4 weeks revenue is exactly that "early termination charge" - in case of BT they charge some amount (which isn't that small relative to normal cost in a given month):

"if you have six months left on your telephone service Unlimited Weekend Plan minimum contract period, you'll have to pay a charge of £5.00 multiplied by six, which is £30."

Try stopping using BT services and telling them that you won't pay a penny more, what do you think they do - roll over??!?!

[northernladuk]

Then the contract should say 1 day notice period and it's ok.

If the contract says 4 weeks notice and it's not honoured then it's contract breach.



Sure, there is "early termination charge." whilst the contract is for 12, 18 or 24 months.

4 weeks revenue is exactly that "early termination charge" - in case of BT they charge some amount (which isn't that small relative to normal cost in a given month):

"if you have six months left on your telephone service Unlimited Weekend Plan minimum contract period, you'll have to pay a charge of £5.00 multiplied by six, which is £30."

Try stopping using BT services and telling them that you won't pay a penny more, what do you think they do - roll over??!?!

Indeed but in BT's case this is explicitly stated in their T&C's and it isn't in ours. This lack, plus the fact we have the situation as per the xmas makes our situation difficult to understand by the client. You are making assumptions they know the difference between an enforced xmas break and enforced notice period break. Hell, we can't even agree so how is a client supposed to know. As I said, the answer would be to be as clear as BT and the like in your contract. In that case it would be a no brainer.

Anyway, the BT contract is a different beast so nothing really to be gained for comparing it.

Believe me I would love some legal eagle to come on here and tell me I am wrong and we should take every client to court that doesn't pay the notice. I will be on it as fast as everyone else... I just can't see that is the way.

We are forgetting here as well it is up to the OP to negotiate with the client. If he pointed out his notice period and got in to this argument with the client he may well get 2 weeks as a compromise and everyone is happy. The terms of the contract are very rarely legally challenged because negotiation negates the need to do so.

[AtW]

Indeed but in BT's case this is explicitly stated in their T&C's and it isn't in ours.

If notice period is stated in contract then it's exactly that - termination clase which means that contract ends that many days/weeks/months after notice was given.

We are forgetting here as well it is up to the OP to negotiate with the client. If he pointed out his notice period and got in to this argument with the client he may well get 2 weeks as a compromise and everyone is happy. The terms of the contract are very rarely legally challenged because negotiation negates the need to do so.

Sure, he should discuss it with the client first - point out at clause of the contract and politely ask to pay the notice period. Why give them 2 free weeks??!?! If he just started the job then he may have well lost some other opportunities, he can't sue for losses from not getting next contract quick enough but why should he forfeit what he is entitled to - 4 weeks notice?

It's a clear cut easy legal dispute - almost all would settle before it goes to hearing as otherwise it would get into public domain.

It's not unreasonable or morally wrong to ask somebody to honour contract that they've signed.

[suityou01]

I'm surprised NLUK is so happy to let a contract breach go unpunished. I though he had some stones