Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My employment contract required me to serve 2 weeks' notice if I wanted to leave the company. In case I didn't provide this notice, and I left within 1 year of joining, I was required to repay the moving expenses the company paid me. Otherwise, employment at will.
I am leaving 1 month after joining, and I provided 2 weeks of notice. The employer accepted my resignation but set the last working day to 1 working day after the date on which I provided notice.
Is this legal?
What should I have done - worked for 2 more weeks, then resigned without providing any notice and repaid the moving expenses? (I would still have earned a positive amount for the 2 weeks) Or should I have requested that the contract read "Employee will provide 2 weeks' notice and employer cannot terminate employment during the notice period"??
I thought I was doing the right thing by providing the notice, but apparently not...
Last edited by Qwertyuiop12; 12-02-2014 at 09:42 PM..
Yes it's legal. Your contract likely did not specify that they were required to pay you for the 2 weeks notice period. Sounds like the contract only stipulated things related to you but not your employer which is not uncommon. It's likely that they were only required to pay you for the hours that you worked and any earned PTO.
There is always a risk of giving notice. I've heard of people who gave notice and then their new offer was rescinded and their former employer wouldn't take them back.
In some industries, it is fairly common for people to be sent home right after they provide notice. Someone who has given notice is risk in some circumstances and in other circumstances, their salary is a waste for the employer. Especially if they are a relatively new hire. After you provide notice, your worth as a "worker" is pretty low but your value is training your coworkers/boss on your duties so they can pick up the work after you've left. If you've just started, they probably don't need you for that.
I've left several jobs throughout my career and always provided proper notice (2 weeks to 1 month depending on the level of the position). Once I was paid through the day and sent home even though I'd given 2 weeks notice. I'd started the job about 5 weeks before giving notice.
B) you don't provide 2 weeks notice no matter how long you stay.
I bet they come after you for the money.
I think you need to re-read your contract. This issue isn't related to the 2 week notice. Rather, it's related to being there less than 1 year and resigning.
You abided by the wording of your contract. That's all that matters to prevent them from coming back at you for expenses.
They chose to not require you to complete the two weeks, which is completely within their ability to do, and shouldn't be pursuing you for any of the other costs, as it was their choice to not accept your offer of notice.
What should I have done - worked for 2 more weeks, then resigned without providing any notice and repaid the moving expenses?
You should have quietly researched the company history on how they typically handle this, then worked for two more weeks and given a two weeks notice, knowing they would let you go right away. And if they didn't, get the flu.
B) you don't provide 2 weeks notice no matter how long you stay.
I bet they come after you for the money.
I think you need to re-read your contract. This issue isn't related to the 2 week notice. Rather, it's related to being there less than 1 year and resigning.
I agree with this and would re-read your contract. Many employers who pay relocation/moving expenses add a 12 to 24 month repayment clause to the benefit package. They just shelled out money to get you to a new location, and want to be able to recoup some of that investment if you choose to leave soon after being hired. I don't see how the fact you gave them a two week notice would have made any difference in that.
My employment contract required me to serve 2 weeks' notice if I wanted to leave the company. In case I didn't provide this notice, and I left within 1 year of joining, I was required to repay the moving expenses the company paid me. Otherwise, employment at will.
I am leaving 1 month after joining, and I provided 2 weeks of notice. The employer accepted my resignation but set the last working day to 1 working day after the date on which I provided notice.
Is this legal?
What should I have done - worked for 2 more weeks, then resigned without providing any notice and repaid the moving expenses? (I would still have earned a positive amount for the 2 weeks) Or should I have requested that the contract read "Employee will provide 2 weeks' notice and employer cannot terminate employment during the notice period"??
I thought I was doing the right thing by providing the notice, but apparently not...
Most jobs I have been in require some time before you are profitable to the company. I suspect with only one month under your belt, you were still costing the company money, rather than an asset. So I suspect they didn't want to pay an additional two weeks without a coresponding value/profit.
Sucks for you, but from a cost management standpoint, it makes sense.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
