Employment rights



Question for the wise ol' SMB.

Mate applied for a job and got a conditional offer saying if his references were satisfactory he'd get the job. If not, they'd withdraw.

He got a notification a week later that all references were fine and someone would call soon to arrange a start date.

Said he's just had an email saying they have had to withdraw the offer due to unforseen circumstances.

He reckons as he met the conditions of the offer they are in breach of contract. I'm arguing unfortunately there was no contract to breach.

Whats the crack?
As commented, if he's not signed anything or there is no evidence of communications that he has accepted an offer of employment, then he has no legal basis for complaint.

You might want to check for the latter before you tell him he hasn't got any recourse (i.e. an exchange involving an e-mail from the company offering the job and an e-mail response from him accepting the post). If this, then you should seek further advice as even though nothing is signed, depending on wording then smoe employment solicitors might consider this enough to argue a case.
 
As commented, if he's not signed anything or there is no evidence of communications that he has accepted an offer of employment, then he has no legal basis for complaint.

You might want to check for the latter before you tell him he hasn't got any recourse (i.e. an exchange involving an e-mail from the company offering the job and an e-mail response from him accepting the post). If this, then you should seek further advice as even though nothing is signed, depending on wording then smoe employment solicitors might consider this enough to argue a case.

I've quoted the actual email exchanged further on page one.

The Government site link suggests if conditions of the offer are met then it's a breach. I always though unless something is signed that's it. But it doesn't appear to be so clear cut.
 
Last edited:
I've quoted the actual email exchanged further on page one.

The Government site link suggests if conditions of the offer are met then it's a breach. I always though unless something is signed that's it. But it doesn't appear to be so clear cut.
Unequivocal wording in, say, an e-mail exchange that might, for example, have led him to submit notice to his previous employer might be the basis of an action against the prospective employer.

I'll have a look later as I'm tied up at the moment.
 
Question for the wise ol' SMB.

Mate applied for a job and got a conditional offer saying if his references were satisfactory he'd get the job. If not, they'd withdraw.

He got a notification a week later that all references were fine and someone would call soon to arrange a start date.

Said he's just had an email saying they have had to withdraw the offer due to unforseen circumstances.

He reckons as he met the conditions of the offer they are in breach of contract. I'm arguing unfortunately there was no contract to breach.

Whats the crack?
Not sure how it works there, but here there would be no contract breach unless he signed a contract. However, it also depends if he signed a conditional contract where if certain conditions aren't met, the contract is null and void. For example, we do drug screening of all employees so they sign a conditional contract where they are hired, but if the drug screening comes back with an issue, then the contract becomes null and void.

Nowt signed just emailed communication, so as I thought, he's fucked.
Yup
 
Not sure how it works there, but here there would be no contract breach unless he signed a contract. However, it also depends if he signed a conditional contract where if certain conditions aren't met, the contract is null and void. For example, we do drug screening of all employees so they sign a conditional contract where they are hired, but if the drug screening comes back with an issue, then the contract becomes null and void.


Yup

That's how I saw it marra, but the link from the government site suggests otherwise when it comes to conditional offers. I'd be amazed if he got a result regardless tbh, they could say owt.
 
That's how I saw it marra, but the link from the government site suggests otherwise when it comes to conditional offers. I'd be amazed if he got a result regardless tbh, they could say owt.
My experience is only with California labor laws, so I'm sure it's very different than the laws there (fuck, they are different in every Sate here as it is). Labor laws are deemed to look as though they are there to protect the employees, but the truth is that they are there to protect the employer. Here in California, he wouldn't have a case. No contract was actually signed. We also have a 90-day probationary period where we can let go an employee with the vague "The company has determined that you're not a good fit" as the reason for letting an employee go and it's perfectly legal. The more vague the reason, the less recourse someone has to file a lawsuit.

Regardless, even if he does have a case, would he really want to work at a company that doesn't really want him? They'll probably make his life a living hell.
 
So this is the crack.

Email titled conditional offer. Which states "congratulations we are pleased to inform you you have been successful in your application and we intend to offer you the position above. This is conditional and subject to your references being satisfactory. If your references are satisfactory you will be awarded the position. If your references are not satisfactory we will withdraw this offer. Please reply ASAP stating your acceptance or refusal of this offer".

He replied he would like to accept the offer.

Then he got a follow up email stating "Your references have been checked and we can confirm they satisfy our requirements. Someone shall be in touch soon to confirm your start date".



That's awful. And is the only scenario I could see where there's literally nothing you or they can do about it (like if funding falls through for a position).

Looks like they haven't actually offered him it yet


Fooked!
 
So this is the crack.

Email titled conditional offer. Which states "congratulations we are pleased to inform you you have been successful in your application and we intend to offer you the position above. This is conditional and subject to your references being satisfactory. If your references are satisfactory you will be awarded the position. If your references are not satisfactory we will withdraw this offer. Please reply ASAP stating your acceptance or refusal of this offer".

He replied he would like to accept the offer.

Then he got a follow up email stating "Your references have been checked and we can confirm they satisfy our requirements. Someone shall be in touch soon to confirm your start date".

He may have a case here, looking at the text.

He's fulfilled the conditional requirements (I.e. references check out) and then the company have said someone will be touch with a start date.

Has your friend submitted notice based on the above as the text could be construed as an agreement he is to be employed by the company?

They've all but said he is to be employed by them and he has accepted. He has a case to be fair.

In the meanwhile, he'd better grovel to his current company in order to withdraw his notice if he has given it. They could say no and then employ him on reduced wages.
 
He may have a case here, looking at the text.

He's fulfilled the conditional requirements (I.e. references check out) and then the company have said someone will be touch with a start date.

Has your friend submitted notice based on the above as the text could be construed as an agreement he is to be employed by the company?

They've all but said he is to be employed by them and he has accepted. He has a case to be fair.

In the meanwhile, he'd better grovel to his current company in order to withdraw his notice if he has given it. They could say no and then employ him on reduced wages.

Not sure on the details re: when he put his notice in etc. but from the stuff I've read it does suggest, as you say, that he has a case. It fits in with the conditional offer bit on here Job offers: your rights which is what he sent to me earlier.

He's currently on the piss apparently :lol:

Looks like they haven't actually offered him it yet


Fooked!

That's what I initially thought too.
 
Last edited:
So this is the crack.

Email titled conditional offer. Which states "congratulations we are pleased to inform you you have been successful in your application and we intend to offer you the position above. This is conditional and subject to your references being satisfactory. If your references are satisfactory you will be awarded the position. If your references are not satisfactory we will withdraw this offer. Please reply ASAP stating your acceptance or refusal of this offer".

He replied he would like to accept the offer.

Then he got a follow up email stating "Your references have been checked and we can confirm they satisfy our requirements. Someone shall be in touch soon to confirm your start date".



That's awful. And is the only scenario I could see where there's literally nothing you or they can do about it (like if funding falls through for a position).
Years ago I went through the application process for the prison service at the same time as an application for Nissan. I had my 2nd interview for the PS and told I had the job. The day after I had my interview for Nissan which I turned up for pissed. I was interviewed by a mag who I took the piss out of relentlessly. It turns out I got the job at Nissan but was turned down from the prison service on Home Office advice. It seems like they can just withdraw offers whenever they want :confused:.
 
Years ago I went through the application process for the prison service at the same time as an application for Nissan. I had my 2nd interview for the PS and told I had the job. The day after I had my interview for Nissan which I turned up for pissed. I was interviewed by a mag who I took the piss out of relentlessly. It turns out I got the job at Nissan but was turned down from the prison service on Home Office advice. It seems like they can just withdraw offers whenever they want :confused:.

That's shocking. Was it just a verbal offer or in writing? I think my marra actually has a case the more I've read though.
 
Not sure on the details re: when he put his notice in etc. but from the stuff I've read it does suggest, as you say, that he has a case. It fits in with the conditional offer bit on here Job offers: your rights which is what he sent to me earlier.

He's currently on the piss apparently :lol:

:lol:

I've had my own, slightly different, legal wrangles.

One was a potential harrasment case with a local University, where I was taken on for a typical limited term research conttract and signed the contract prior to starting. I'm of the impression that by the time I started, they' change their mind but because I'd signed the contract on the dotted line they were stuck with me. I had then bang to rights.

It was made clear that I was a "second choice, a stop gap measure" and they would just "have to make do" with me. A very uncomfortable year followed, which I was glad was over. They had me at the point of walking twice, which I didn't do in the end due to me not being entitled to unemployment benefit if I did.

The behaviour of the two in charge of me was a mixture of not telling all I needed to know to do a job (leading to a very embarrasing situation with the key client) and making me feel I could do no right. In another instance, I wrote a note saying there was problems with a piece of equipment, which disappeared without trace.

After some consideration after I left, I decided not to complain as it was literally my word against the senior academic concerned. A previous case against him had also failed. Basically, Universities close ranks to protect their own.

Separately, two years ago, I found myself having to bring myself up to speed with redundancy law. My boss had been sacked for gross negligence and fraud a year before and there were suspicions the company were making remaining people who worked for him redundant to clean the slate. As it happens, all they would say is they were making the position redundant and nothing could be proven. Others who worked for him had already left, knowing the writing was on the wall.

Events like that do sharpen your employment law skills, however, nothing is certain.

In your friend's case, it appears the potential employer has left a paper trailand in doing so, dropped a bollock your mate could use against them. That said, I would get him to talk to a soliciter about his situation, noting actions he may have taken (i.e. submitting notice) as a result of believing he had obtained the new job.

I believe the old phrase for his prospective employer's actions is "breach of promise", though the terminology has certainly changed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Back
Top