Is this UK employment contract normal?
September 7, 2008 2:19 PM Subscribe
Is it normal in the UK for a job to start with a one-year contract before becoming permanent? What about if the job was advertised as permanent and the one-year contract clause wasn't mentioned until the job had been accepted and the new employee had already moved and begun working?
I recently completed an MSc and, in June, applied for a job that was to start in August. The job was advertised as permanent. I was offered the job in June, accepted it with a start date in August, but naively didn't demand a contract immediately and accepted that the contract would be signed once I began working. I worked for a week and finally the contract was given to me. One of the clauses in it really surprised me - basically, it was a one-year temporary contract that would roll into a permanent post after one year.
The contract also stipulated a 3-month trial period (that's fine), and no mention of the other benefits I had negotiated before starting (distance working part of the time, a raise after 6 months). I queried this and was told their solicitors had advised the temporary contract part, but that they would add the other benefits to a revised version.
At this point, I'm feeling a bit dumb for turning up to work without having gotten the contract nailed down when I accepted in June. I'm also feeling a bit taken for a ride as there was no mention of this job being temporary for the first year in the job ad, interview, offer, or follow-up emails. This is my first job in the UK but I have a good bit of work experience in other countries. I've never had a one-year contract written into a job that was advertised as permanent before.
So, is this normal in the UK? Should I sign? I am prepared to walk away from this job and look for something else if I feel I can't trust my employers.
I recently completed an MSc and, in June, applied for a job that was to start in August. The job was advertised as permanent. I was offered the job in June, accepted it with a start date in August, but naively didn't demand a contract immediately and accepted that the contract would be signed once I began working. I worked for a week and finally the contract was given to me. One of the clauses in it really surprised me - basically, it was a one-year temporary contract that would roll into a permanent post after one year.
The contract also stipulated a 3-month trial period (that's fine), and no mention of the other benefits I had negotiated before starting (distance working part of the time, a raise after 6 months). I queried this and was told their solicitors had advised the temporary contract part, but that they would add the other benefits to a revised version.
At this point, I'm feeling a bit dumb for turning up to work without having gotten the contract nailed down when I accepted in June. I'm also feeling a bit taken for a ride as there was no mention of this job being temporary for the first year in the job ad, interview, offer, or follow-up emails. This is my first job in the UK but I have a good bit of work experience in other countries. I've never had a one-year contract written into a job that was advertised as permanent before.
So, is this normal in the UK? Should I sign? I am prepared to walk away from this job and look for something else if I feel I can't trust my employers.
Shady shady shady. Definitely don't leave it alone.
But if you want the job, and if they otherwise seem friendly and nice and worth it, work with them to work out this kink. It could just be a lack of communication at one point in the chain.
posted by Magnakai at 3:01 PM on September 7, 2008 [1 favorite]
But if you want the job, and if they otherwise seem friendly and nice and worth it, work with them to work out this kink. It could just be a lack of communication at one point in the chain.
posted by Magnakai at 3:01 PM on September 7, 2008 [1 favorite]
Aiiieee. My experience is in local authorities and charities, and no that is not at all normal. I would ask for a revised contract with the conditions you agreed when they offered you the job, and if not look elsewhere (unless the market is really tough for your field right now and you have few options), If the position was advertised as permanent, then you have sturdier legs on which to stand - they are breaching employment law by then offering you a temporary contract (3 months' probation is normal - the least you can expect. Mine was six months). Seek legal advice if you want to take that angle further, but sometimes just bringing it to the employer's attention is sufficient (as in "Oh, I'm sorry Ms HR. The contract I agreed to was permanent. There must be a mistake. Can you please correct it?").
posted by goo at 3:03 PM on September 7, 2008
posted by goo at 3:03 PM on September 7, 2008
basically, it was a one-year temporary contract that would roll into a permanent post after one year.
The precise wording is important here. No matter what probationary period is described in the contract, statute says there is always effectively a 12 month probation. It may be that your contract just reflects the fact that a UK employer can 'fairly' dismiss an employee for any non-discriminatory reason in the first year.
Or, does the contract specify that there is only a year's funding, say?
no mention of the other benefits I had negotiated before starting (distance working part of the time, a raise after 6 months)
If it's not already established in writng somewhere, I suggest you assert your entitlement to those terms in writing now. Your "contract" is not just a piece of paper, it is all that is agreed between you, in writing and verbally.. - but if it comes to enforcing terms, it's better to have your side down in black and white.
Likewise, if the original ad said the job was permanent, that could arguably be part of the contract. Though the subsequent written terms and conditions would generally carry more weight.
posted by wilko at 3:25 PM on September 7, 2008
The precise wording is important here. No matter what probationary period is described in the contract, statute says there is always effectively a 12 month probation. It may be that your contract just reflects the fact that a UK employer can 'fairly' dismiss an employee for any non-discriminatory reason in the first year.
Or, does the contract specify that there is only a year's funding, say?
no mention of the other benefits I had negotiated before starting (distance working part of the time, a raise after 6 months)
If it's not already established in writng somewhere, I suggest you assert your entitlement to those terms in writing now. Your "contract" is not just a piece of paper, it is all that is agreed between you, in writing and verbally.. - but if it comes to enforcing terms, it's better to have your side down in black and white.
Likewise, if the original ad said the job was permanent, that could arguably be part of the contract. Though the subsequent written terms and conditions would generally carry more weight.
posted by wilko at 3:25 PM on September 7, 2008
I went to work for a company where my first contract was a year long, even though the job itself was generically permanent. I just let it slide, it was all fine and not a harbinger of any nasty surprises a year down the line, when I think it was replaced with a new contract or something if I remember correctly. So, I've seen at least once before, and it was no big deal. I have no explanation for why it was the way it was, but it wasn't a shady trick. Then again maybe that's just because they didn't want to disappear me after 12 months, who knows?
posted by so_necessary at 3:35 PM on September 7, 2008
posted by so_necessary at 3:35 PM on September 7, 2008
If the company changes the conditions of employment after you've already agreed to them, that's pretty shady. It doesn't matter what the conditions are, I wouldn't trust the company.
posted by blue_beetle at 4:06 PM on September 7, 2008
posted by blue_beetle at 4:06 PM on September 7, 2008
The issue may be that UK law does not recognise trial periods as properly legal, they are more an HR thing. What's important in terms of rights is one year of continuous service. Prior to that one year of continuous service, you do not acquire the right not to be unfairly dismissed. Therefore, unless there is discrimination, you can be dismissed with the appropriate one week notice or your contractual notice, if your contract gives you more. After one year, that changes. Your employer may just be being scrupulous.
posted by A189Nut at 5:25 PM on September 7, 2008
posted by A189Nut at 5:25 PM on September 7, 2008
Without taking a look at the _exact_ wording, can't really say eitherways. Does the contract specifically say that the position will become permanent after a year? If so, in terms of clauses, how is year 1 different from year 2 and 3 and so on?
Not specifying the other bits is indeed troublesome. The general approach I have for we'll-do-this-later responses is to ask for a specific time-period, and after that time-period, go after them relentlessly. You may or may not prefer such an option.
posted by the cydonian at 8:30 AM on September 8, 2008
Not specifying the other bits is indeed troublesome. The general approach I have for we'll-do-this-later responses is to ask for a specific time-period, and after that time-period, go after them relentlessly. You may or may not prefer such an option.
posted by the cydonian at 8:30 AM on September 8, 2008
This thread is closed to new comments.
I'd be demanding a contract reflecting the negotiations in the interview (have you them in writing). I wouldn't accept that contract. A permanent position is exactly that. Unless they stipulated some element of "permanent on a 12 monthly review basis" then you can kick up a polite stink, I think.
posted by Brockles at 2:53 PM on September 7, 2008