Problems with Ex employer.

[JimOreson]

I had early retirement nearly 2 years ago.
Since I left 3 people have been employed doing the job I did and have left suddenly.
There was a clause in my retirement terms saying that I had to answer any queries in relation to my past job for a reasonable period of time.
I am still getting phone calls 2 or 3 times a week and I feel in view of the time I have been gone this is unreasonable. Some of these calls have been at 7.30 in the morning on my mobile when I have been on holiday.
Does anybody know if there is a definition of reaonable time in this case.
Everybody else who had this clause in their retirement who retired at the same time as me were called occasionally for about 3 months and the calls then stopped.

[knowabit]

Do you answer the calls? If so, just stop.

[tonywiltshire]

I do not know the express term in your contract that requires you to still provide information or if you receive any pay for this assistance. If there is no mention of times or dates in your contract I suggest you are pro-active and dictate times that are convenient to you and a final date after which you will not provide information if that is what you wish, having done so for 2 years is quite enough, If you continue to receive calls at inconvenient times remind the caller of your conditions.

[factor-fiction]

Hello again.

[factor-fiction]

Unbelievable

[Sipowicz]

Do you smell a rat, factor?

[Canary42]

A reasonable time in my opinion would be six months. Two years is ridiculous. Get yourself a Premium Rate number and make a mint from their continued pestering.

[Brimoan]

I had a few calls about my job about 2 years after I left and went in couple of times to help.
Unfortunately the person who took over passed away.
Under the circumstances I had some sympathy as the person was only about 30 but I still said that somebody else should look at that job because who knows if I will be in a position to help in the future.

[factor-fiction]

This person had a similar problem to Brimoan and JimOreson
http://www.theanswerb.../Question1080239.html

[Brimoan]

Hi factor30

I think the real difference here was Amy was being called back hopefully as a once off and the real dispute is about the expenses as she had moved.
In Jim's case he is getting annoyed about the number of times he has been called and money is not an issue.

[Maydup]

I think its time to break the link and change your mobile phone number. At least they can't phone you on holiday then and if they continue to phone at home on your main number, pop an answer machine on to take the call and only return the call if you feel inclined.

You are under no obligation to give support to an ex-employer and there are no negative consequences to you stopping.

[factor-fiction]

I agree, Madeup- completely

[Brimoan]

I wnder if Amy was a banker?.
One of my friends got called back as a witness in relation to a long term loan about 5 years after he retired.
I think he was called to court as he was the only one still still in the UK from when the loan was signed.

[factor-fiction]

Maybe Jim's had to go off to answer another call, Brimoan

[penelope2]

When I retired I was called as a witness to an Industrial Tribunal by my ex employers nine months later. When I declined I was threatened with a subpoena.

[Brimoan]

I witnessed a coach accident in Scotland about 30 years ago.
I was sent a citation to appear in court.
At the time I went for advice from the CAB and they said make sure it was a legal citation as that was the only way my expenses were guaranteed.

[factor-fiction]

Just say you can't remember and then start to engage them in conversations about the price of bread, the state of your health, the weather.... they'll soon get fed up of ringing you

[Ellipsis]

> Does anybody know if there is a definition of reaonable time in this case

I don't know about a definition, but I would say that 2 years is definitely NOT reasonable. Reasonable would have been up to 3 months in most normal jobs, or maybe up to to a year if you were central to the organisation - in which case, you'd probably expect to be paid for your time.

What are they going to do if you get hit by a bus?

There is something seriously wrong with their processes and training if they need to rely on you 2 years after you left. If they have infinite call on your time without paying you anything, they're probably breaching minimum wage regulations!

While you continue to support them, they'll continue to ask. Tell them enough's enough, and enjoy your retirement.

[joko]

i would block their number and write a letter to them stating that in future you will not be assisting anyone with any future calls.
You are not obliged to after 2 years, and explain why - that its becoming intrusive.

if they do catch you unawares just play dumb, say 'i dont know' to every question.... if they know they will get no help then they wont bother.

but are these questions things only you know the answer to?
or are they just being lazy, by telling staff to ring you?

if they are things only you know - tell them to compile a written list of questions and post it to you with an SAE - respond to each question, then send it back stating that is the last time you will answer these questions.

[factor-fiction]

Well joko- it seems from some of the past posts on AB that there is a problem with employers putting unreasonable demands on retired employees.

For example in this case here Dawnfrank was told 2 years aftershe must that
"conduct [her] affairs on an impeccable manor as if [she] was still employed by the company"
http://www.theanswerb...5.html#answer-6777897

Then this person was expected to travel the length of the county 7 years after retirement to make a statement
http://www.theanswerb.../Question1080239.html

And poor Brimoan in this thread had to answer queries and go into work to help out after he'd retired because his replacement had died.

Then there was this condition imposed on Lynnspar
http://www.theanswerb.../Question1114995.html

Then there was aydat who had conditions imposed after he ritired threatening to withdraw his pension for giving a reference
http://www.theanswerb...7.html#answer-6929203

I don't know whether JimOreson will return to this thread but it seems he isn't alone in experiencing these problems. Let's hope he sees the advice given .

[joko]

factor - its bizarre isnt it? - i can understand them wanting the person not to say bad things about the company and i get that for a short handover period the employee should be on hand to help make the switchover as smooth as possible - but other than that i dont see how any employer can honestly believe they have so much rights over the lives of people who no longer have anything to do with them!
they have very little control of employees private lives even when they still work for them let alone when they have moved on.

id like to know if any company has ever successfully taken action against an employee who refused to comply.