Contract of employment question

[cassa333]

Hi,

If I have a signed contract of employment for 1st jan 2000 and another was issued on 1st jan 2003 but I didn't sign it which one is the one to use if for arguments sake the terms in the second were less favourable

Thanks

[terambulan]

Ur bound by the 2nd even though tis unsigned. You knew of the update and didn't complain at the time, so its seen as 'acceptable to you.'

What do u object to in it?

[cassa333]

The original said 12 weeks redundacy notice and the later one only 1 weeks notice.

[buildersmate]

Redundancy is merely one of the potentially fair reasons for dismissal. Any notice period in the contract is the same for any reasons of dismissal - it isn't special or peculiar to a redundancy situation.
Since you've evidently been there since before 1 Jan 2000, you already have accrued 8 weeks minimum notice period - irrespective of what the employment contract says - that's one week for each completed year of employment.

[cassa333]

Sorry, I think I worded it wrong.

I am getting 1.5 weeks pay per year as redundancy pay but feel that I should also get 12 weeks notice. If that makes more sence. I am down by about 2k.

My (ex) employer is also paying me my redundancy at �1000 a month. Can he do that? I thought I was supposed to get it all at once? as a result he won't give me my p45. If I get a new job what am I supposed to do?
Thanks

[buildersmate]

Two possible answers - the Statutory Minimum (SM) and the 'I'm a decent employer who does more than this'.

If SM
You are entitled to your contractual Notice Period.
You are also entitled to one week's pay for every complete year of service, capped at �330 per week. The multiplier of 1x becomes 1.5x if you are over 41 - check out these multipliers and less if under 22.
The killer is that �330 doesn't go very far to represent a week's pay.

The 'we do better' scheme
Employers can give whatever they wish in severance payments greater than this and many do. Armed with the above info, you can work out whether what you are being offered is better than the SM. There is no obligation to pay more (unless it is part of your T&Cs of employment - which is really rare to have included).
The point is, your question about how many weeks contractual notice you are on becomes somewhat irrelevant. Provided your employer is paying at least the SM, it's down to you and them to agree. I can confirm that every redundancy payments scheme I have been involved in negotiating IS based on actual years completed service - not contractual. Its fairer that way - the longer one has been there, the bigger the payment. The more one gets paid, the bigger the payment.

One final point - these schemes that offer more than the SM usually include agreement wording that you are being paid a severance which includes money in lieu of notice. Your employment terminates soon after the date of declared redundancy. This means your employer pays the severance amount without deduction of tax and NI (up to �30k). This is advantageous to you (it is also advantageous to the employer who doesn't pay employers' NI on it). Your P45 will have an earlier date on it - but you still won't be able to claim JSA until after the termination of NORMAL length of your contractual notice period.