contract ended abruptly

[filmmaker]

Hello was recently employed on a p/t temporary basis but my contract has ended suddenly. The reason I was given for this is that the needs of the company has changed. I have turned down work for this company. Am i entitled to compensation, ie paid to the end of original contract.

I am not interested in trying to sue the company I just want to know what is fair. Can any help with advice, past experience etc.

[????]

" p/t temporary basis "

I think that's why you're f*cked

[Mick Mac]

Read the contract, but generally less than a year of service and they can end it easily and pay you your notice period.

[paragon]

As mentioned - depends on the contract. There should be a stipulated notice period in there for each side to give notice. Can be as little as immediate notice in some instances. Generally not a lot you can do in those situations.

[RosieH]

As above, check the contract, and if you don't have one, learn the lesson for next time.

Same thing happened to me just before Christmas - I was working for a company I knew, it was all terribly amicable so I wasn't too fussed about not having it in writing. Until they ended my contract with one day's notice a month before it was due and right at the beginning of December when no one was hiring - an impecunious Christmas was the result. To be fair to them, they ended all freelancers contracts that week and made 10 redundancies the next, so they weren't just being flighty, but still, it pays to protect yourself.

[SteveT]

It is difficult to protect yourself from a company that suddenly falls into difficulties and struggles for its own survival from bankruptcy.

[RosieH]

For sure, but from my experience, both as a freelancer and as a manager, most companies will honour a contractual notice period.

[woofmarkthedog]

NO, MOVE ON

[Mick Mac]

RosieH Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> For sure, but from my experience, both as a

> freelancer and as a manager, most companies will

> honour a contractual notice period.

"Most" - Surely they don't have any choice Rosie? I'd be rather miffed if I did not receive a notice period.

Also, if they pay you funds in lieu of notice and ask you to leave on the day, it should be tax free, unless the contract said you could be paid in lieu.

[RosieH]

Well, I worked during the summer holidays of uni for a company that went bankrupt - I had to give all the staff their final pay packets and they didn't get redundancy as there wasn't the money to pay them. Longer term they might have got it (does the government help out here?) but certainly not as they were shown the door.

[Mick Mac]

Yes Rosie - if the company goes bust you are not guaranteed anything, that's correct - but otherwise your entitled to your notice in one form or another. Redundancy is a more tricky issue. I did not take it from the OP that the company had gone bust, but its a fair point.

[SteveT]

If it was easier to get rid of staff then companies would shed and hire more readily, as it is a dire cock up by succeeding governments then this will be forever the case, where companies hold on to staff for as long as they can, which weakens the company often to destruction.

One case I know of where the staff were being radically reduced at a company downsizing operation, was this one lady who had just been axed, went to the boss and hugged him and kissed him on both cheeks inspite of his downcast rigid stance, and said 'thankyou for employing me I've enjoyed working here and I do hope when all of this misery is over and you are back on your feet you will consider me a worthwhile employee in the future'. He didn't re-employ her ever again.

He married her some years later.

[Moos]

See, that's what's wrong with this world, political correctness gone mad. Because she's a WOMAN, she was able to take advantage of her boss and marry him, now that wouldn't have been an option for her male colleagues, would it?

[Muley]

Most married men would agree that their wife is the boss Moos

[silverfox]

Moos Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> See, that's what's wrong with this world,

> political correctness gone mad. Because she's a

> WOMAN, she was able to take advantage of her boss

> and marry him, now that wouldn't have been an

> option for her male colleagues, would it?

Civil partnerships are now legal so yes, it could have been

[SeanMacGabhann]

If I ever end up living in SteveT's desired world, shoot me

On what basis do you make this kind of hypothesis Steve? Have a look around the world at countries with STABLE workforces. Now have a look at countries with UNSTA.. sory, I mean "flexible" workforces

[Moos]

silverfox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Moos Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > See, that's what's wrong with this world,

> > political correctness gone mad. Because she's

> a

> > WOMAN, she was able to take advantage of her

> boss

> > and marry him, now that wouldn't have been an

> > option for her male colleagues, would it?

>

>

> Civil partnerships are now legal so yes, it could

> have been

Bah, more politically correct nonsense - so now you're saying we all have to be "gay" if that's the term that we have to use now, is that it? Honestly.

P.S. Muley, quite right. Unfortunately Mr. Moos does not subscribe to this theory, but then we haven't been married long.

[bigbadwolf]

"P.S. Muley, quite right. Unfortunately Mr. Moos does not subscribe to this theory, but then we haven't been married long."

Sorry to butt in here but Moos, but what colour trousers are you wearing today? If you're wearing the trousers that is.

[bigbadwolf]

In case you're wondering. Muley P.M'd me asking if I could ask you that question because he's a bit scared of you, that's all.

[woofmarkthedog]

SteveT ( The Forums own David Brent ) wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> One case I know of where the staff were being

> radically reduced at a company downsizing

> operation, was this one lady who had just been

> axed, went to the boss and hugged him and kissed

> him on both cheeks inspite of his downcast rigid

> stance, and said 'thankyou for employing me I've

> enjoyed working here and I do hope when all of

> this misery is over and you are back on your feet

> you will consider me a worthwhile employee in the

> future'. He didn't re-employ her ever again.

> He married her some years later.

--------------------------------------------------------

So he bought her back off the liquidator then ?

W**F

[SteveT]

SeanMG wrote:- On what basis do you make this kind of hypothesis Steve? Have a look around the world at countries with STABLE workforces. Now have a look at countries with UNSTA.. sory, I mean "flexible" workforces

I am not as negative about it as you Sean, I see it as a positive thing which will create more short-term and later on long term employment, not less. It will strengthen industry long term too. I see it as a wealth creator for all involved.

Sadly I am sometimes wrong or misguided in my beliefs.

[SteveT]

woofmarkthedog wrote:- The Forums own David Brent

About time Cesar Milan taught you some manners PUP, a bit of "calm, assertive, energy," around your ear might be the best training.