Employers Genius solution to staff retention issues.

[HangTime]

I think the chances are they do genuinely want longer notice periods because they think this will make their staff less attractive to rival employers, and give them a bigger window to replace staff who are leaving. My wife works in healthcare and they changed from 1 month to 2 month notice a while back because recruiting new staff was/is quite a slow process (due to having to do DBS checks, validating their professional body membership etc, and no doubt just general cumbersomeness of their recruitment process) meaning that if someone gave a month's notice, they were unable to recruit a replacement within that window.

However, I agree wholeheartedly with the OP that it isn't addressing the underlying issue of staff retention and has been handled poorly.

 

[plasmahal]

Hi,

Apologies for taking a while to update this thread.

To cut a long story short, the management recently decided to drop the proposed change which they say is due to staff objections and they are disappointed at the generally negative reactions.

I'm sure this is a small victory in what will become an ongoing campaign.

Before they dropped the proposed change they also changed one of their reasons for the change. They dropped the staff retention issue as a reason and they stated they wanted to look favourable to the customer when the contract comes up for renewal. They citied job security as a reason too!!!!!

As you can guess this cheered us up no end but we also pointed out that if they lost the contract, the majority of the working staff would be TUPE'd over to the next supplier.

On a personal note the job hunting is a lot slower than expected but the slog goes on to find something closer to home.

 

[NickK]

However if Pretty much everyone says ok then they have other options open to them.

No. Your employment contract is legally individual to you (although a template is used). Unless you have signed that your union will represent you in this matter - however most modern companies don't have unions.

If they have a reduced set of people indicating they will not sign then they cannot simply make their role redundant. If they force a change through then I would advise to seek legal advise ASAP. A severance package may be the outcome.

I've been on a 3 month notice period, then as part of an acquisition, the old company was wound up but the new company roles were made available with a one month period. Different from the OP's predicament. A 3 month period will put off potential employers, however the more senior the person is the more time it takes for the interview process - my last one took since mid-November and I'll be due to start work in April/May.. with 8 interviews!
If an potential employer is impressed enough they will wait as 12 weeks will go fast and by the last month everyone will have moved the work away from you - with the final handovers in the last week.

Just ensure that the contract doesn't have any asynchronous clauses around redundancy (i.e. your full notice period + package is paid).

I personally think that a company that is going to enforce a 3 month period legally suffers - the reason is this: a leaver will gain more varied experience and if they're interested in a few years down the line they could be an excellent hire. Not only do you know each other, they become more valuable than anyone simply sent on a subject/management course.