Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,506
Out of interest, where on the yougov link that is dedicated to it, and linked above do you get the suggestion that such a deduction is illegal?
Final salary payment before leaving - nightmare pls help
- Thread starter scotty365
- Start date
Out of interest, where on the yougov link that is dedicated to it, and linked above do you get the suggestion that such a deduction is illegal?
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,506
and
Maybe I misunderstood.
Didn't OP state the training courses had a contract which stated he had to repay if he left within two years?
Maybe I misunderstood.
That's exactly how I would have expected the matter to be handled.
Then you can come to agreeable payment terms for the invoice and if the ex-employee didn't pay you would proceed through small claims court
The rules, as usual, seem a little grey on what constitutes legal deductions, even the point of it being illegal to leave someone below the NMW has exceptions!
But in all cases of rulings, as ACAS told the OP, it's about 'reasonableness' and making a deduction so large as to leave the employee with £0 wages is not reasonable.
Hikari said:
Yes, but repay =/= deduct your entire wages
That it's in his contract to repay simply means he has to repay. But if they want to deduct from his salary, then there needs (at the least) to be an appropriate clause saying that they can.
OP has said there is no such clause.
Could this be construed as unfair dismissal?
OP was prevented (whether through company incompetence or intentionally is still unknown) of completing a nationally accredited course funded by work so he fails. He understandably is a bit miffed at this and the company and has really no choice but to seek employment elsewhere which is more equitable to his skills/experience portfolio.
He doesn't have a choice because the course was a waste of time and he is locked into his job (which we have heard he is doing all sorts of things for much lesser wages) because they will charge him the full fee if he leaves the company.
Rather underhand practices imo. Surprised so many people on here agree with it...or maybe i shouldnt be surprised
OP was prevented (whether through company incompetence or intentionally is still unknown) of completing a nationally accredited course funded by work so he fails. He understandably is a bit miffed at this and the company and has really no choice but to seek employment elsewhere which is more equitable to his skills/experience portfolio.
He doesn't have a choice because the course was a waste of time and he is locked into his job (which we have heard he is doing all sorts of things for much lesser wages) because they will charge him the full fee if he leaves the company.
Rather underhand practices imo. Surprised so many people on here agree with it...or maybe i shouldnt be surprised
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 35,717
Could this be construed as unfair dismissal?
OP was prevented (whether through company incompetence or intentionally is still unknown) of completing a nationally accredited course funded by work so he fails. He understandably is a bit miffed at this and the company and has really no choice but to seek employment elsewhere which is more equitable to his skills/experience portfolio.
He doesn't have a choice because the course was a waste of time and he is locked into his job (which we have heard he is doing all sorts of things for much lesser wages) because they will charge him the full fee if he leaves the company.
Rather underhand practices imo. Surprised so many people on here agree with it...or maybe i shouldnt be surprised
We might not know the full story here. It may have also been the other way around (not saying it is) but we know what threads are like on forums...
Got to look at both sides but in this case who knows.. apart from OP should have gone to employer.
Does there? Surely from their point of view, there would need to be something explicit saying they can't do that. It would depend on the precise wording of the clause, and other clauses as well, and seems to me that the contract should have specified payment terms, but if it doesn't, it doesn't automatically mean that they can't do it.
As few others have said, it can be a bit of a grey area. Which means it wouldn't be cheap to go down a legal route.
Has the OP considered at all speaking to them to agree on something that works for both parties?
See post #82. They can't make the deduction unless the contract specifies so (and even then it might still be illegal)
Doesn't post 67 say -
"something you’ve done and your contract says you’re liable for it, eg a shortfall in your till if you work in a shop" ?
The contract he signed would say he's liable for it. Even if it isn't entirely specific about the method of repayment (which, again, it might. Difficult to say without seeing the entire contract).
And if we're going into 'might', then it's going to get expensive to figure out which is right. Far cheaper to just speak to the employer, no?
Edit: Also to keep in mind - for as useful an indication as the .gov sites might be, they aren't the strict legal basis on which decisions are made. They may be oversimplifying things. Contract says he is liable for it. Just because it wasn't expressly agreed that it would come out of wages, doesn't mean it can't. Though I know nothing about employment law, so perhaps i'm wrong. Coming at this from a normal contract law perspective.
Last edited:
If he can prove that he was unable to complete the course due to incompetence by the company then hes not liable at all. Of course he needs to prove it though. Hope he has logged everything. But he should have taken this grievance up with the company first (are they so small they dont have an internal procedure/policy for this?) instead of just leaving.
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 12,260
- Location
- Derby
Could this be construed as unfair dismissal?
OP was prevented (whether through company incompetence or intentionally is still unknown) of completing a nationally accredited course funded by work so he fails. He understandably is a bit miffed at this and the company and has really no choice but to seek employment elsewhere which is more equitable to his skills/experience portfolio.
He doesn't have a choice because the course was a waste of time and he is locked into his job (which we have heard he is doing all sorts of things for much lesser wages) because they will charge him the full fee if he leaves the company.
Rather underhand practices imo. Surprised so many people on here agree with it...or maybe i shouldnt be surprised
This is the point I made earlier. I can see it being grounds for constructive dismissal if there is evidence that the company has been negligent or intentionally blocking an employee from completing a nationally accredited course and therefore blocking the career path that had been put in place. I certainly think you should go and see a employment solicitor regarding this matter. Even if its just for the free 30 min consultation to ascertain if you have grounds.
I think as others have said here you are in a difficult position. You have an argument that they should only be deducting for net loss.. i.e. they should be off-setting a % of the training cost as they have had some benefit from that.
Unfortunately from what you have described unless you can talk to someone in a position of power within the business to come to a resolution then any action that you take now in the form of a letter or threat of legal action is likely to take some time to resolve and will not immediately resolve your financial situation.
You best course of action is to probably try and have a discussion with the FD or MD of the business. Rationally explain your position factually (do not become angry or emotional).. explain that:
* You believe they have acted unfairly in the timing of the letter to you not allowing adequate time for you to respond.
* You believe they have deducted an unreasonable amount from your salary in terms of net cost of the training to the business.
Offer them a without prejudice compromise position that hopefully sees some income for you and a fair return on costs for the business.
I am no Legal HR expert.. best to take proper legal advice if you can.. (check insurance policies and the like many do offer these services).
In the meantime I would be talking to creditors about the situation.. you will find most should be quite reasonable in offering perhaps a payment break for 1 month or an agreement on slightly later / reduced payment, etc... start with your largest creditors such as mortgage, etc..
Unfortunately from what you have described unless you can talk to someone in a position of power within the business to come to a resolution then any action that you take now in the form of a letter or threat of legal action is likely to take some time to resolve and will not immediately resolve your financial situation.
You best course of action is to probably try and have a discussion with the FD or MD of the business. Rationally explain your position factually (do not become angry or emotional).. explain that:
* You believe they have acted unfairly in the timing of the letter to you not allowing adequate time for you to respond.
* You believe they have deducted an unreasonable amount from your salary in terms of net cost of the training to the business.
Offer them a without prejudice compromise position that hopefully sees some income for you and a fair return on costs for the business.
I am no Legal HR expert.. best to take proper legal advice if you can.. (check insurance policies and the like many do offer these services).
In the meantime I would be talking to creditors about the situation.. you will find most should be quite reasonable in offering perhaps a payment break for 1 month or an agreement on slightly later / reduced payment, etc... start with your largest creditors such as mortgage, etc..
two sides to this one - is it reasonable to take all the training costs back in one go and leave someone with nothing? No it's not
However - is it reasonable to expect someone who is leaving employment to not think about/question what happens when they leave and how the repayment is made - no
It's a hard one all round - without proper legal advice/representation - I think you'll have a job getting any other options from you previous employer.
However - is it reasonable to expect someone who is leaving employment to not think about/question what happens when they leave and how the repayment is made - no
It's a hard one all round - without proper legal advice/representation - I think you'll have a job getting any other options from you previous employer.
Associate
- Joined
- 11 Apr 2006
- Posts
- 831
- Location
- Yorkshire
Enough advice/comment has been given. I don't want to add salt to wounds but may I in the most respectful way suggest going forward you work towards at least 6 months salary as savings in a bank account. Eat home made ham sandwiches and stop all luxury item spending till you do it. Use Money Saving Expert for ideas to reduce expenditure and live within means. No offense but your cash flow is poor because of a lack of budgeting. Read a book called The Millionaire Next Door.
Based on the information supplied I don't think a constructive dismissal claim would have any legs. Issues relating to training, career development etc. should first be formally raised using the internal company procedures and I can't see a tribunal agreeing that the OP had no other reasonable option but to resign when he did. It seems likely that his already having another job lined up and only complaining about his training/contractual terms weeks after resigning (presuming he has now actually done so in writing) would be used to argue against this being a genuine case of constructive dismissal.
Having taken legal advice - I'm told that because my contract does not state that it is to be taken from my salary. It is an unenforceable contract and that is why this is the standard practice - to take from the final salary. If I was to take it to court I would on balance of probablity win the case and be paid the whole amount back and the company would forfeit the chance of a counterclaim because of the action they have taken. They never specified how the money would be taken - and thats the key point.
However, all of this means nothing because I'm not going down that road - I don't mind paying for it, it's the amount in one hit. I wrote a letter to the company and gave it to my manager this morning (then came home cos I feel ill and didn't sleep) and he phoned me back mid morning to inform me they had an hour long meeting this morning at director level and came to an arrangment - this is in the post today and I should have it tommorrow. He hinted that it was positive outcome for me.
As I stated before I have a very good relationship throughout the company at all levels and they know there was no malice in leaving and that it took a lot for me to make the decision to leave - I had a career path set out but they failed to deliver despite my raising the issue over and over. During the meeting with my manager we discussed how this had happened and his words were 'We need to know what happened because we made a mistake and we have to take steps to make sure it doesnt happen again'.
I didn't expect to get a favourable outcome if I'm honest and they didn't have to make any decision so quickly. Well, for now it looks not so bleak - the company I'm going to phoned the recruitment consultants to say I could start immediately after they spoke of my situation with them, again I'm lucky this was decided so quickly. My intention is to do this the right way - it's unlikely I will jump ship early to save a few bucks.
For the savers on here that can't understand why I don't have them is because the single salary I get supports my grand daughter, my daughter who is at uni, my missus and myself and a 3 bedroomed house and all the bills and a car to get to work - 24k is not a lot these days, wages have stalled out and the cost of living has shot through the roof - I couldn't afford to save but I will in my new job. I heard something on the radio a while back that said more than half of households are 1-2 pay checks from destitution, it's a fact that desposeble income has fallen while living standards have too in recent years, it has slowly been erroded away until people are living payday to payday.
However, all of this means nothing because I'm not going down that road - I don't mind paying for it, it's the amount in one hit. I wrote a letter to the company and gave it to my manager this morning (then came home cos I feel ill and didn't sleep) and he phoned me back mid morning to inform me they had an hour long meeting this morning at director level and came to an arrangment - this is in the post today and I should have it tommorrow. He hinted that it was positive outcome for me.
As I stated before I have a very good relationship throughout the company at all levels and they know there was no malice in leaving and that it took a lot for me to make the decision to leave - I had a career path set out but they failed to deliver despite my raising the issue over and over. During the meeting with my manager we discussed how this had happened and his words were 'We need to know what happened because we made a mistake and we have to take steps to make sure it doesnt happen again'.
I didn't expect to get a favourable outcome if I'm honest and they didn't have to make any decision so quickly. Well, for now it looks not so bleak - the company I'm going to phoned the recruitment consultants to say I could start immediately after they spoke of my situation with them, again I'm lucky this was decided so quickly. My intention is to do this the right way - it's unlikely I will jump ship early to save a few bucks.
For the savers on here that can't understand why I don't have them is because the single salary I get supports my grand daughter, my daughter who is at uni, my missus and myself and a 3 bedroomed house and all the bills and a car to get to work - 24k is not a lot these days, wages have stalled out and the cost of living has shot through the roof - I couldn't afford to save but I will in my new job. I heard something on the radio a while back that said more than half of households are 1-2 pay checks from destitution, it's a fact that desposeble income has fallen while living standards have too in recent years, it has slowly been erroded away until people are living payday to payday.
Last edited: