A question relating to leaving a company

[ClichéGuevara]

I'll elaborate more if needed, but in general, if you leave a post and the employer subsequently advertises it at a higher rate to attract a suitably experienced and qualified replacement, would you have a claim of any kind?

I'm thinking specifically of a company with a final salary pension scheme, and the person is taking early retirement.

 

[cisamcgu]

If they were made redundant then maybe, if they simply resigned or took an early retirement settlement package then no

I think ..

 

[newfhouse]

Could you ask your union?

 

[ClichéGuevara]

Could you ask your union?

Non-union, but there are still ways that can be an option.

 

[ClichéGuevara]

If they were made redundant then maybe, if they simply resigned or took an early retirement settlement package then no

I think ..

That's certainly what a rummage around the web suggests.

 

[markemark]

No. Once you leave they can advertise the role with an entirely different pay structure, terms and contract. Nothing to do with you. If you are made redundant then the role can not be advertised in any which way as it is the role that is redundant, not the person.

IANAL

 

[ClichéGuevara]

Cheers all, that was useful, and seems to confirm what I've read in various places, but wasn't 100% clear.

 

[Bromptonaut]

I'd say the same as others.

It's pretty common for employers to rely on inertia with long standing employees who are perceived to be 'stuck in the mud' and then find that they need to pay more for a properly experienced replacement.

 

[T4tomo]

Cheers all, that was useful, and seems to confirm what I've read in various places, but wasn't 100% clear.

yews i'd agree with that.

The only possible exception I could think of is maybe in somewhere like civil service if they changed a post to a higher paygrade after someone left / retired then arguably there might be a tenuous claim, particular if a grievance or similar had been raised re that whilst in post.

 

[fossyant]

My colleague that works for me is leaving for more money. We have no policy of retaining staff. They are considering upping the Grade for the posts (although not mine). Unfortunately, cash in the pocket is of more use to younger staff, they forget about our generous holidays and really good pension scheme - it doesn't seem important paying into one - loads in late 20's 30's who don't pay into our scheme

 

[presta]

I'd say the same as others.

It's pretty common for employers to rely on inertia with long standing employees who are perceived to be 'stuck in the mud' and then find that they need to pay more for a properly experienced replacement.

There was a guy at our place who got a job offer, then resigned in the hope of them offering a pay rise to stay. He spent his 3 month notice fidgeting in his chair waiting for a pay rise that never came, then left. Two weeks later he was on the phone asking for his job back. They took him back, so all was well.

Until a couple of years later that is, and then he did the same again. Handed his notice in, no pay rise, left, and asked for his job back again. They didn't have him back the second time.

I just can't imagine why anyone would do that unless they're in the sort of employment where there's absolutely nothing in it bar the money.

 

[bikingdad90]

@presta, your colleague has gone the wrong way about such a thing. Would have been better if he showed his employer the post and said he was considering leaving but really liked the company etc and could they do anything as it’s a comparable role.

The problem with the market at the moment is that salaries are high to attract staff but in the long term it’s to the detriment of the hiring company as they end up paying a premium for average Joe and end up expecting top dollar bill. It would be better to pay a market premium with the salary base dropping back down once the recruitment market settles.

When a colleague leaves a role doesn’t need to be advertised like for like. The only exception is Tupe and redundancies.