# Notice period - month or 4 weeks or what



## Lamps (12 Aug 2008)

_This is taken from boards btw, its for a mate whos leaving his job and HR are being dicks and it may mean we have to cnacel our holiday so we need all the help and advice.



Ok I’m leaving jobs, have managed to secure 2 weeks off work inbetween jobs. So I gave my notice and booked a holiday.

Now a few days after giving my notice I get an email of HR saying my leaving date will be 3 days later than I said, as I have to give a months notice and I only gave 4 weeks notice (I just calculated the month as 4 weeks). My manager has no problems me going these 3 days earlier and I even have 1 holiday day left to cover one of the days, but HR wont back down. They say a contract is a contract, which I think is true but this is petty. I’m going to have to cancel the holiday now and will only get a week away instead.

It’s not even as if I’m running the show I work in admin and there’s not even much work at the min, they've been talking about letting people go!! And I’m still on probation period as well, anyone else think this is crazy?

A reply:

Does the contract specifically say "calender month"? A period of four weeks is often referred to a a month and if the contract was drawn up by your employer you are entitled to the benefit of the ambiguity. Ask to have the matter referred to a Rights Commissioner if HR are being awkward.

From the free dictionary:-

"The lunar mouth is composed of twenty-eight days only. When a law is passed or contract made, and the month is expressly stated to be solar or civil, which is expressed by the term calendar month, or when it is expressed to be a lunar month, no difficulty can arise; but when time is given for the performance of an act, and the word month simply is used, so that the intention of the parties cannot be ascertained then the question arises, how shall the month be computed? By the law of England a month means ordinarily, in common contracts, as, in leases, a lunar month; a contract, therefore, made for a lease of land for twelve months, would mean a lease for forty-eight weeks only. 2 Bl. Com. 141; 6 Co. R. 62; 6 T. R. 224. A distinction has been made between "twelve months," and "a twelve-month;" the latter has been held to mean a year. 6 Co. R. 61."_

What do yis think?


----------



## shipibo (12 Aug 2008)

Go to HR Manager and explain face to face the problem.

If they are not wearin, you ,go on your holiday.

just a thought : 

Have you messed them about ???, if so, apologize and hopefully they will let bygones be bygones.


----------



## Jackiep (14 Aug 2008)

It is true that a month - in terms of an emplyment contract - is normally taken to be a calendar month.  Things which might help your case are for example it you were paid monthly and that actually was every four weeks then you could reasonably assume that this is the company's interpretation of a month.  On the other hand if it is by calendar month then this would support there argument.

Having worked as a HR Manager I'm afraid if the contract says month it most likely would be interpreted as a Calendar Month.  

I agree that a visit to the HR Manager is by far your best bet.


----------



## ClubMan (14 Aug 2008)

Couldn't he just leave and forget about the notice period? What is the worst that can happen? He misses out on payment for some of the notice period presumably? And he probably won't be able to use them as a referee in the future? They cannot withold payment for ununsed holidays accrued or notice period worked as far as I know.


----------



## wheeler (17 Sep 2008)

What is the story in this case.?

A friend of mine has a 2 month notice period in his contract and HR are saying he must work the 8 weeks and is not entitled to use his holidays as part of the notice.

What is the worst that can happen - loss of reference is not an issue for him - but could the company take him to court? And if so then to what end?


----------



## teachai (18 Sep 2008)

Of course he can use the holidays. 

If HR aren't going to allow the sue of the holidays are they going to pay for unused holidays?
If  they pay for unused holidays, your friend  will effectively lose out financially because if the holidays are paid for they will be taxed. 

I'd rather have the days off.  In fact I'd insist on it


----------



## WaterSprite (18 Sep 2008)

teachai said:


> Of course he can use the holidays.
> 
> If HR aren't going to allow the sue of the holidays are they going to pay for unused holidays?
> If  they pay for unused holidays, your friend  will effectively lose out financially because if the holidays are paid for they will be taxed.
> ...



A company can insist that holidays cannot be taken during a notice period, and then would cash the holidays out.  It should be in the contract that this is the case.  Even if it isn't, an employer still retains the right to approve the timing of holidays, as during normal employment.  The employee isn't losing the holidays if s/he is being cashed out for them and all "normal" holiday payments are taxed so the employee is in no way losing out.  All that said, as other posters have alluded to, it's hard to see a company going after an employee on this point, even it was the company's legal right.

I think it's very bad form to e.g. give a month's notice and then ask to take 2 weeks' holidays during that period - it affects any possibility of an effective handover.  The OP's post only concerned an extra 3 days however, the denial of which seems a little churlish on the employer's part to me.

Sprite


----------

