IT people what's your notice period

3 months is barmy unless it's a managerial position of some sort or a much needed line management role.

1 month for myself I believe, although most who leave take their holiday for most of it and leave after a week :p
 
3 months is of massive benefit to the employer, it means they hold all the cards. You say you're leaving it gives them 3 months to find a replacement which given the specialist nature of what some of us do can take a while. Well that and the recruitment process in most companies is terrible and often takes 3 months end to end. :D
 
Well mine was originally 1 month but they changed it to 3 after the guy who helped me look after our Citrix infrastructure left leaving just me with all the knowledge/the only one who could support it... They were scared I'd go the same way but to be honest I personally think its good for both sides.
 
Well mine was originally 1 month but they changed it to 3 after the guy who helped me look after our Citrix infrastructure left leaving just me with all the knowledge/the only one who could support it... They were scared I'd go the same way but to be honest I personally think its good for both sides.

What benefit did you get from this change? How can it possibily be good for both sides that they extend your notice period? :confused: There's nothing at all in that for you.
 
What benefit did you get from this change? How can it possibily be good for both sides that they extend your notice period? :confused: There's nothing at all in that for you.

But doesn't the notice period also affect how long you're paid for if your company decides to make you redundant, in which case three months is better?

I was under the impression the legalities of notice periods means that if you wanted to leave a job you could - if you chose - walk out and leave whenever you want but you'd not get paid for your notice if you didn't serve it (or a reference, probably :p).
 
But doesn't the notice period also affect how long you're paid for if your company decides to make you redundant, in which case three months is better?

There are two different notice periods. The one you give when leaving the company by choice, and the one the company gives you when making you redundant.

I have to give 4 weeks, my company has to give 90 days. If they wanted my 4 weeks to become 90 days they would need to pay for it :)
 
3 months here, pretty standard.

But these thing don't have a strong legal basis. This is more about respect and should go 2 ways, I.e. The employer should give you the same period before laying you off.
 
What benefit did you get from this change? How can it possibily be good for both sides that they extend your notice period? :confused: There's nothing at all in that for you.

Well in my case if they wanted rid of me for any reason then they'd have to give me 3 months notice or 3 months pay. Which would be awesome to have whilst I look for another job.

I really like my job and the company I work for so for me, the fact they did this shows me I'm a fairly valuable member of the team. Especially when most of those below me are only on 4 weeks notice. I guess its just the way different people look at it?
 
You didn't make it clear that they also only had to give you 4 weeks notice before the change.

That's really bad.
 
Well in my case if they wanted rid of me for any reason then they'd have to give me 3 months notice or 3 months pay. Which would be awesome to have whilst I look for another job.

I really like my job and the company I work for so for me, the fact they did this shows me I'm a fairly valuable member of the team. Especially when most of those below me are only on 4 weeks notice. I guess its just the way different people look at it?

No, if you didn't negotiate a payrise at the same time, you've been taken advantage of really.
 
Moneywise I'm already doing ok though. I could earn far more doing the same thing in London for example but the added stress, expectation from employer with regards to the increased wage and the travelling time really doesn't appeal to me.

You could be right, maybe I have been taken advantage of and I'm now in a worse position. But the way I see it I don't want to go anywhere and I enjoy my job, the varying tasks I get given, the freedom and its current prospects. I also know my bosses look out for me and really value me as an employee so there's no point in upsetting that for a relatively small monetary gain?
 
But doesn't the notice period also affect how long you're paid for if your company decides to make you redundant, in which case three months is better?

I was under the impression the legalities of notice periods means that if you wanted to leave a job you could - if you chose - walk out and leave whenever you want but you'd not get paid for your notice if you didn't serve it (or a reference, probably :p).

I made this point earlier - it is a 2-way deal.

If your employer expects you have have a 3 month notice period then they will almost certainly give you a 3 month warning of redundancy (or just payout).

You could just walk out the door the same day if you wanted to but don't ever expect a good reference. And in the US this is matched by the fact they could could fire you and kick you out the same day.


The 3 month notice period is just a polite civil agreement between both parties. Don't screw over the company, don't have the company screw all over you.

The notice period is important for companies because it can take 3-6 months to find a suitable replacement (skilled workers) which could leave the company very vulnerable. Likewise it might take you 3 months to find a new job so it is important for the company to give you plenty of notice in case of redundancy.
 
Back
Top Bottom