Reply to: The rule about offer and acceptance concerning offers of work

[cojak]

And I'm closing this thread.

We are not your lawyers - pay someone to do your work for you.

[WTFH]

I think that simply you are not able to reply to the legal issues raised by my thread but this is not a problem. I invite you to carry on trying to find a reply to these legal issues.

You need to get professional help.

[northernladuk]

I think that simply you are not able to reply to the legal issues raised by my thread but this is not a problem. I invite you to carry on trying to find a reply to these legal issues.

Yeah come on WTFH. Pull your finger out. Chop chop..

[window]

I think that simply you are not able to reply to the legal issues raised by my thread but this is not a problem. I invite you to carry on trying to find a reply to these legal issues.

[WTFH]

You tell me that my opinion does not relate to employment law. It was the reply that I was expecting for a long time because you are the first to explain why you disagree with me. So the question is whether or not the principle of ‘offer and acceptance’ of contract law applies also to employment contracts? My opinion is why not after all it is not a contract of employment a contract like any other contract?

Ask an employment lawyer, they will explain it to you. It seems like your knowledge does not extend beyond the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company., that's why you need an employment lawyer to help. Not ACAS, not something you'll get legal aid for, and not something you can waste days/weeks/months on various internet forums trying to find a mystical answer that says what you want to hear.


I'm not sure if this forum is ever going to be of any help to you, perhaps, rather than focusing your energies on refusing to read and refusing to provide honest answers on here, you could better spend your time talking to an employment lawyer.
They will, of course, want to see your actual contract, not the abridged/annotated one that you are presenting here episodically.

[window]

You tell me that my opinion does not relate to employment law. It was the reply that I was expecting for a long time because you are the first to explain why you disagree with me. So the question is whether or not the principle of ‘offer and acceptance’ of contract law applies also to employment contracts? My opinion is why not after all it is not a contract of employment a contract like any other contract?

[WTFH]

Window, if you want us to help you, please read our answers and try to learn from them rather than repeating your opinion of contract law. Until you are prepared to accept that your opinion of contract law is flawed, and that your opinion does not relate to employment law, you're never going to get an answer that you like.

So maybe to make it easier for you:
What do you want us to tell you? What will make you happy?
You're not wanting to hear the truth, so what are you wanting to hear?

[window]

1.
Concerning the principle of ‘offer and acceptance’ of contract there is a difference between offering something and withdrawing something that we have already offered and has been accepted. It is like in the day to day life you are not forced to offer a gift to anyone and anyone is forced to accept it but if you offer it to someone and he accepts it and you change your mind and want it back he can refuse to give it back to you

2.
You say

“But if they don't offer, you have nothing to accept.

So back to zero hours”

The important point is that the casual workers were sent an email at the beginning of the project asking them if they accept to do the project but they were not sent an email at the end of every day of work asking them if they accepted to come the day after to carry on working on the project. Therefore we cannot say that every day of work was a separate offer of work so what was offered to me and accepted by me was a project

[cojak]

So he needs an employment lawyer to review his contract, not people on an Internet forum who are struggling to understand what he is trying to say since he jumps from facts straight into what his understanding of employment law, which seems muddled at best.

+1

[cojak]

But if they don't offer, you have nothing to accept.

So back to zero hours.

[window]

I was asked to work seven hours per day during about two weeks that the project should have lasted

I say my contract is not a zero hours contract because in a zero hours contract it is understood that if a company offer work and it is accepted the company should have the right to cancel this offer of work. However because in my contract there is no a clause which says that my employer has the right to withdraw an offer of work my contract is not a true zero hours contract because the principle of ‘offer and acceptance’ in contract law as explained in my previous posts even if in its heading it is stated ‘zero hours contract’

In my contract it is made reference to the employer offering work and the casual worker accepting it so the the principle of ‘offer and acceptance’ of contract law applies

I could be incorrect in this case I would like you explain me why. For example you can explain me why my interpretation of the principle of ‘offer and acceptance’ of contract law could be wrong. It is what we called a discussion. After all this forum is about contracts and the principle of ‘offer and acceptance’ is very important in contract law

[LondonManc]

I was asked to sign a contract where it is stated at the top that it is a zero hours contract but a contract is not a zero hours contract simply because we call it a zero hours contract because there is no statutory definition of a zero hours contract. Hence in order a contract is what we consider as being a zero hours contract we need a clause which says that the employer has no obligation to offer work and the worker has no obligation to accept it. However if the party agree that work could be withdraw even if it has already been accepted there should be in the contract another clause which says that the employer reserved the right to withdraw offer of work at his discretion because of the principle of contract law on offer and acceptance.

My contract has not been terminated but contrary to the other casual workers I was removed from the project the first day what means that it is very unlikely that my employer offers me work again

Stop talking in riddles. Yes or no?

You signed a zero-hours contract however you try and dress it up - how many hours were you ACTUALLY asked to work? Not theoretically promised in an interview or casual chat. ACTUALLY asked to work.

[LondonManc]

TL;DR - He wasn't terminated, just removed from the project.

Wow. I asked for a yes or no.

[WTFH]

So he needs an employment lawyer to review his contract, not people on an Internet forum who are struggling to understand what he is trying to say since he jumps from facts straight into what his understanding of employment law, which seems muddled at best.

[cojak]

I was asked to sign a contract where it is stated at the top that it is a zero hours contract but a contract is not a zero hours contract simply because we call it a zero hours contract because there is no statutory definition of a zero hours contract. Hence in order a contract is what we consider as being a zero hours contract we need a clause which says that the employer has no obligation to offer work and the worker has no obligation to accept it. However if the party agree that work could be withdraw even if it has already been accepted there should be in the contract another clause which says that the employer reserved the right to withdraw offer of work at his discretion because of the principle of contract law on offer and acceptance.

My contract has not been terminated but contrary to the other casual workers I was removed from the project the first day what means that it is very unlikely that my employer offers me work again

TL;DR - He wasn't terminated, just removed from the project.