I'm commenting on something incorrect that has been mentioned in the thread - if what you're posting isn't even relevant to the OP/the thread then why post?
Handed notice in, not accepted
- Thread starter Shoza
- Start date
- Status
I'm commenting on something incorrect that has been mentioned in the thread - if what you're posting isn't even relevant to the OP/the thread then why post?
Soldato
I've seen this done a few times by an ex colleague. Kept threatening to leave until he's salary was so high it was more than his managers.
Lazy manager couldn't be bothered to find some one new was part of it as where other more dysfunctional reasons.
I know a guy like that who handed in his notice twice in one year and got pay rises both times (the second time he was brazen enough to not even go to an interview but simply make up a job offer that he'd been given a year before - knowing that he probably could still move there if really needed) couple of years later he did it again, we'd got a new CEO by then and he'd done it right at the moment that two other people who could do his job had just left... so his manager had to go to the CEO and explain that this guy is really vital, the clients like him and we're screwed if he goes... he ended up with a substantial pay rise which now puts him at a level where other companies he's not established himself at likely wouldn't pay to poach him.
though for most people, if you accept a counter offer, I reckon you should do it once and then leave within a year anyway using the additional pay rise/responsibility you just got to aim for better roles and wrangle even more out of your new employer
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,442
The question was raised in this very thread. My response is not only correct, but a perfectly relevant response to the person who raised the question.
You clearly want an argument, so here you go...
I don't really want' an argument, there isn't really an argument to be had, I simply corrected something posted that was incorrect that's all. Another poster asked why on earth they'd want to sack him - the answer is they wouldn't, there isn't any benefit to doing so. You then made up some 'facts' and then when those incorrect 'facts' have been challenged decided that they applied to some scenario not even relevant to the OP's scenario (which the question you were answering was directed towards).
This particular subform is used by people exchanging information relating to a fairly important aspect of their lives so perpetuating stuff that isn't really relevant or truthful isn't helpful.
This particular subform is used by people exchanging information relating to a fairly important aspect of their lives so perpetuating stuff that isn't really relevant or truthful isn't helpful.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,442
Where?
I've not stated a single untruth and you've "corrected" nothing.
Says who?
YOU?
I've already demonstrated that there could be reasons and explained why, with real world examples. You seem to be reading my suggestion of what 'could be' as some kind of definitive assertion that these are the reasons. It was merely a suggestion based on previous events, in response to an open question that was about the OP's particular situation, but addressed to everyone in the thread.
It's primarily in military and civil service contracts, but does also feature in some private company contracts such as with a number of our employees right here in this very office, right now. So no, I didn't make it up.
I quite clearly said that "There may be a variety of entitlements and terms in his contract" - Tell me I'm wrong...
If you feel I have somehow caused offense or broken some forum regulation by responding to a conversational point that has derailed the thread to unacceptable levels, feel free to report me.
Otherwise, **** off and grow up.
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 2,332
Doesn't want an argument.
Argues with anyone and everyone in every thread
Argues with anyone and everyone in every thread
No he didn't!
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 2,332
He's behind you!!!!
you're now being particularly hostile simply because I've corrected a misleading post you've made, it isn't helpful, the thread and this sub forum is simply for sharing information/advice
again there isn't any benefit to sacking someone after they've handed in their notice - if there are unvested shares they lose them anyway, pension is unaffected (this isn't a myth that is helpful to be spread or left unchecked, the OP clearly isn't a member of the military he's a regular person moving between companies) and you don't generally continue to enjoy employee benefits are you've resigned and are no longer an employee! Those areas, in the context of the OP resigning from one firm to move to another are utterly irrelevant to being sacked. I don't really know why you're getting worked up about it if anyone needs to 'grow up' it is you given your reaction there.
Deleted member 651465
D
Deleted member 651465
Two ways to look at this:
They value your skill set and will want to keep you by offering a bigger salary / package. In which case, you may be tempted to stay.
However, these situations are rarely clear cut and could see you work another 3 months before you see that extra money / responsibility / progression “because business”.
My take; if they valued you so much why weren’t they forthcoming with offers? I’m glad you got what you wanted but expect them to have marked your card.
They value your skill set and will want to keep you by offering a bigger salary / package. In which case, you may be tempted to stay.
However, these situations are rarely clear cut and could see you work another 3 months before you see that extra money / responsibility / progression “because business”.
My take; if they valued you so much why weren’t they forthcoming with offers? I’m glad you got what you wanted but expect them to have marked your card.
Last edited by a moderator:
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,442
There was nothing to correct and it was perfectly relevant to the post in question.
Like I said, it depends on the contract and, as suggested by other posters, they may wish to delay the acceptance of such notice for the purposes of enacting a dismissal or other punitive action.
Again, depends on the contract.
We're not military, civil service or a public service, yet we DO lose ours under a number of conditions.
Once again, it depends on your contract.
I really don't know why you're not reading what I've written and just kicking off, but there it is...
no it wasn't it was misleading and frankly incorrect
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,442
If you feel misled, perhaps you should read and understand the words (the words, the words, the words, the words, the words...) before getting your knickers in a twist!!
But you won't, will you, because you're just looking for something to argue over...
I'm honestly not looking for something to argue over and I don't feel mislead - your post was incorrect and misleading for the reasons already mentioned - employee benefits generally stop anyway when you leave a company, your unvested stock is lost anyway and your pension generally can't be touched. Not to mention that the idea of some company opening themselves up to an unfair dismissal claim and fraudulently sacking someone after they've handed in their notice on the basis of supposedly saving some money for these flawed reasons is pretty far fetched in the first place.
You've then picked one of the reasons (pensions) and tried to argue that it can somehow apply in the rare instance where it is covered in a contract... it doesn't really change much because realistically that is unlikely to be the case for the OP and the whole premise is pretty detached from reality.
I really don't know why you want to argue this, you made a silly post that's all, I called it out because it was silly and outlined why... I can assure you I wasn't looking for additional silliness and pointless followup post from you.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,442
Yes, yes, it did not address the OP's own post directly with information related to their and only their precise situation, therefore is utterly null and void and wrong and inaccurate in your opinion, yadda yadda....
"Generally", yes... but not always and that was what I was addressing.
That'd never be the official reason, of course. Punitive proceedings already in progress, or some other such case, is one example.
And yet it does happen. Ask Unison, or some other union rep. An unfair dismissal claim is not automatically upheld. It's just a claim and plenty get refuted where others are upheld.
You really don't get it, do you?
It was nothing to do with the OP specifically and never intended thus. It was a hypothesis, in answer to a question inviting such.
And I wasn't even talking to you in the first place, yet here you are championing the argument and trying to take high ground on the basis that I chose to explore a question posed, rather than only talk directly to the OP about just their specific situation.
**** it - Ban me then.
the question you answered was posted in the context of this thread and in a general context your answer is flawed anyway... I really don't know what you're trying to argue - you've put forth a tenuous argument for one of the three factors you commented on... it just doesn't stand up that is all. I really don't know why you want to get worked up over it or start ranting/swearing.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,442
How is it flawed, then?
You haven't explained that at all.
By contrast, I know it happens and I have no idea what the OP's contract does or doesn't say, so until full and exact details are posted, it remains - as I suggested - a possibility. I'm not arguing the likelihood or anything, just answering the question presented.
It stands up because it happens. It's happen to people I've known and I've heard about plenty more from union rep colleagues, who use them as examples of what is and is not legal for companies to do, as well as how some were able to legitimately get around it and how employees did the same.
The fact remains that some companies do prefer dismissal of employees as it means certain entitlements cease, where they'd otherwise continue after leaving that company, depending on contract.
I'm not worked up. I'm sure you'll try and tell me different on that too, though...
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,442
Theory in general vs likelihood in one particular situation. Not a flaw.
Not directly applicable to the OP's exact situation. Not confirmed either way and still not a flaw, especially as you're not chastising other posters for the exact same crime.
Made up facts. Nope, situation exists right here and can (and does) easily exist elsewhere. OP might have been one such example. Not a flaw.
Forum is used by people wanting information, therefore information is irrelevant. Not really a flaw until OP confirms either way and still potentially applicable to others, as well as a conversation point. Not a flaw.
Misleading. You seemingly don't understand the purpose of the post. Not a flaw.
Post is silly. Your opinion. Not a flaw.
Yeah, ok then....
- Status