Legal / HR Damsels?

[littlerose12345]

Does anyone know much about employment law?

We've been given new contracts to sign at work, and most of the changes seem ok but I'm concerned with one regarding notice period.

Before if I wanted to leave then I would give 4 weeks which I think is pretty standard.

Now they are saying 4 weeks, plus one extra week for every year you have worked at the company over four years. I've been here since Dec 2003 so that would mean I'd need to give 8 weeks notice? Not too happy about that really. Do I HAVE to sign it?

TIA

[Jenevieve]

I'm no HR expert so will leave that to others - but one thing that occured to me is does it work the other way? Do they have to give you 8 weeks notice too? I'd personally probably go along with it if it gave me more security/pay out on leaving.

[littlerose12345]

Good point, have just checked and they would have to give 8 weeks too

[Bop]

In my experience longer notice periods are generally good.

Rarely do companies hold you to more than 4 weeks but you get more if they make you leave. I've also managed to get garden leave when I was on a longer notice period - getting paid to stay at home is good.

Bop

[Indian Light]

It will work in your favour if they decide to make your role redundant (touchwoood they dont). Also, if you decide to hand your notice in, notice period is negotiable.

[redhed]

It's a pretty standard clause tbh, though is there really no maximum? What if you were with them 30 years?

[littlerose12345]

It's a pretty standard clause tbh, though is there really no maximum? What if you were with them 30 years?

Max is 12 yrs

[Dr Spouse]

My contract has a 6 month notice period and usually you would be held to this...

[Fiz]

Even if you don't sign it, by turning up for work you have accepted the new terms and conditions. But I don't think it's an unreasonable clause, although I can see that it's quite a change for you.

[bluekat]

It works in your favour if they're going to pay you off. I'd sign.