5 ms·
Not a stupid question by any means- it's an important one! In my case it's done based on the original contract, which provides for 30 days notice.
by BrianMcElroy 16y ago
Not a stupid question by any means- it's an important one!
In my case it's done based on the original contract, which provides for 30 days notice.
- xuki 16y agoThen what kind of work do you ask your employee to do in the last 30 days?
- allwein 16y agoIt's safer if you terminate them immediately and just give them 30 days severance pay, which is the same thing. I'm not sure I'd trust some people not to have a negative reaction and try to sabotage their project.
- BrianMcElroy 16y agoAgreed. It's easy to get worked up about paying for nothing, but the potential downside is often greater.
- pmjordan 16y agoDepends on the person and the circumstances of leaving. In most cases of firing or redundancy (vs. because they quit) it's safer to just pay them for the notice period but not let them to come into work anymore (severance). If they weren't that useful to begin with, you're not exactly missing out. If you're letting them go in some amicable way, it may be different, but I'd imagine you'd want to be very careful they won't do any damage.
- NickPollard 16y agoOut of interest, what kind of evidence/due-diligence/etc. do you need to make your case for dismissal? Do you have issues with people attempting to sue for unfair dismissal?
- BrianMcElroy 16y agoThere's a big difference between working with employees, something I know very little about, and working with contractors, which I have much more experience with. In the case of a contractor, it's possible to simply end the engagement without the same burden of evidence or due diligence.