Employee's obligation after signing appointment letter

[Simonsoh]

if a person sign a letter of appointment with a new coy, start date of employment is one month later. but for some reason, on the 3rd week (one week to start date of new job), decides he does not want to join, what are his exposure?

 

MOM website say nothing in the MOM law applies cuz the employer/ employee relationship havent start. but coy has every right to persue civil claims.

 

question is how often does this happen? any HR expert here...?

[Kangadrool]

The reverse is also true.

[Mockngbrd]

depends how much they want to go after the employee, cos they wasted their time / opportunity costs.

Edited April 21, 2014 by Mockngbrd

[Jman888]

if a person sign a letter of appointment with a new coy, start date of employment is one month later. but for some reason, on the 3rd week (one week to start date of new job), decides he does not want to join, what are his exposure?

 

MOM website say nothing in the MOM law applies cuz the employer/ employee relationship havent start. but coy has every right to persue civil claims.

 

question is how often does this happen? any HR expert here...?

 

 

for hirer usually just LLST

[Azhiwen]

Don't think companies will bother to pursue civil claims. My colleague from my previous company signed with Company A which got back to him quickly with an offer. Just as he was about to begin work at Company A, Company B called to offer him better terms and he jumped ship then. He didn't mention anything about being brought to court by the first company.

 

I think its just not worth the company's time to go do so, especially if we are just normal office workers and not one of the top level executives where jumping ship may have some form of collateral effect on the organisation.

[Ktglfc]

look thru the employment letter T&C.

 

If nothing, just politely inform the company, and thank them for the opportunity and understanding.

Don't abruptly cut the ties, cos you never know when you may go into the same company next time.

[Little_prince]

by right can claim one mth notice.

 

think got case cot sue applicant before

[Carnoob]

It depends on the position that you had been recruited for and how the company values candidates. If they had agreed for you to join one month later, they may have stopped all recruitment for the position.

 

So if it is a senior appointment, the company may decides to sue you for breach of contract because you are not covered by MOM. PMET not more than SGD4,500 is covered not the rest.

 

But if you had signed but decides against it after 3 days or a week, the company may not pursue as they still have time to do recruitment. However, remember it is also a personal reputation at stake when anyone signed an appointment letter and later decides to bail.

 

I'm more worried about reputation as the company may not take legal but they will blacklist and I may not get a job offer from the same company again.

[Darryn]

There will be two issues at play -

 

What CAN the employer do,

What is it WORTH the employer doing.

 

Whether or not the employee can "jump ship" will be in the terms written in the employment contract (once letter of offer is signed, you are an employee)

 

Most of the low - mid level contracts I see are such that for non-confirmed staff, notice is anywhere between 1 week and 1 month.

 

So, if the employee jumps ship with less than the notice period - by rights, they have to pay in lieu of notice as per the contract.

 

By left, however - it's something pretty difficult for the employer to be worthwhile pursuing. I don't think employment is covered by small claims court - so you have to engage a lawyer to chase it through the court system.

 

The expense of engaging a lawyer, court costs etc etc will be way more than you could expect to recover. Of course - if you are right, you will be awarded costs. BUT my understanding is that it is rare for 100% of costs to be awarded - figures like 60% are more common. By the time that you factor in even 40% of costs, with the uncertainty of winning - against someone that doesn't want to work with you, it doesn't seem like much of a winning proposition to me.

 

Now of course - the employee needs to remember that Singapore is a very small place still, and you never know when you will run across someone again, so you don't want to be burning bridges.

 

By the same token - no employer wants the reputation that they sue and "bully" employees (yes, I know, employer is in the right, so it's not really bullying, but still, they have a power differential and who wants to work for someone like that?)

 

The upshot? As an employee - I would be as honest with the employer as possible, while still not going to work, as the employer - I would KPKB but ultimately LLST

[Wt_know]

no recourse

even employee report to work ... he/she can resign with 1 week notice (before confirmation) ... chop chop

 

similarly, the employee given up a stable job and went to a new company

giving his/her best and yet the "supervisor" feel no shiok also can give 1 week notice ... chop chop

 

unless we are talking about C-group ... got golden handshake and million dollar bonus kind of contract

Edited April 21, 2014 by Wt_know

[Simonsoh]

If a new recruit who has signed the letter of employment fails to turn up for work

If a new recruit has signed the letter of employment but subsequently informed the employer that he does not intend to start work with the company and failed to turn up on his first day of work, the Employment Act does not apply as the employer-employee relationship has not started.

Hence the employer will not be able to claim notice pay or any compensation under the Employment Act.

If the employer wishes to claim compensation from the recruit, he should pursue a civil claim through his own lawyer.

found this at MOM website. so am i right to say max jialat is the employee is exposed to max 1mth salary compensation plus cost?

 

talking about a sub-5k position here. i am sure all recruitment efforts have stopped. cuz only one position available.

[1fast1]

if a person sign a letter of appointment with a new coy, start date of employment is one month later. but for some reason, on the 3rd week (one week to start date of new job), decides he does not want to join, what are his exposure?

 

MOM website say nothing in the MOM law applies cuz the employer/ employee relationship havent start. but coy has every right to persue civil claims.

 

question is how often does this happen? any HR expert here...?

By no means am I a HR expert. But I would never advocate this. I'm not even looking at it from a legal standpoint - more of a "matter of honour" standpoint. You've already given your word (and bound it with your signature) to join this company. They've taken your word at good faith, and stopped looking for other candidates, probably already told the other applicants "position's filled, best of luck elsewhere". Now you play them out like this. Think about how it would feel if the company did the same to you. You've tendered notice to your old employer, or already quit outright, and the new company pulls out the safety net from under you. Wouldn't you be aggrieved?

 

I'm sure, if the situation was reversed, you would pursue a legal claim. Probably the company has a similar right (breach of contract), but whether they choose to do so or not depends on whether they have other ready applicants in the pipeline and how much trouble they want to go through over you. But even if it's legally not readily compensable, it doesn't make what you're doing morally or ethically right.

 

Bottom line: before doing anything like this: ask yourself how much your honour is worth. Can you really put a price on it? Not meaning to be melodramatic, but this is the way I feel.

 

BTW, when I use "you", I'm assuming you're speaking of yourself. If you're quoting a third party example, I withdraw the second person pronoun - but what I said applies to him/her, of course.

Edited April 21, 2014 by Turboflat4

[RadX]

By no means am I a HR expert. But I would never advocate this. I'm not even looking at it from a legal standpoint - more of a "matter of honour" standpoint. You've already given your word (and bound it with your signature) to join this company. They've taken your word at good faith, and stopped looking for other candidates, probably already told the other applicants "position's filled, best of luck elsewhere". Now you play them out like this. Think about how it would feel if the company did the same to you. You've tendered notice to your old employer, or already quit outright, and the new company pulls out the safety net from under you. Wouldn't you be aggrieved?

 

I'm sure, if the situation was reversed, you would pursue a legal claim. Probably the company has a similar right (breach of contract), but whether they choose to do so or not depends on whether they have other ready applicants in the pipeline and how much trouble they want to go through over you. But even if it's legally not readily compensable, it doesn't make what you're doing morally or ethically right.

 

Bottom line: before doing anything like this: ask yourself how much your honour is worth. Can you really put a price on it? Not meaning to be melodramatic, but this is the way I feel.

 

BTW, when I use "you", I'm assuming you're speaking of yourself. If you're quoting a third party example, I withdraw the second person pronoun - but what I said applies to him/her, of course.

 

 

totally agree and i advocate all HR practitioners to start a service called

 

LINKEDOUT....

 

so potential employers can search for such ppl who have hoodwinked previous employer to be with such antics.

 

well, looks like even sub 5k salary employees seem to have less grey matter, or ethical principles for that matter. Totally no honor to oneself and the larger part, society

[Tjkbeluga]

Next, you will see someone say, "We are trained by gahmen to be selfish, so it's gahmen's fault we are like this"...

 

By no means am I a HR expert. But I would never advocate this. I'm not even looking at it from a legal standpoint - more of a "matter of honour" standpoint. You've already given your word (and bound it with your signature) to join this company. They've taken your word at good faith, and stopped looking for other candidates, probably already told the other applicants "position's filled, best of luck elsewhere". Now you play them out like this. Think about how it would feel if the company did the same to you. You've tendered notice to your old employer, or already quit outright, and the new company pulls out the safety net from under you. Wouldn't you be aggrieved?

I'm sure, if the situation was reversed, you would pursue a legal claim. Probably the company has a similar right (breach of contract), but whether they choose to do so or not depends on whether they have other ready applicants in the pipeline and how much trouble they want to go through over you. But even if it's legally not readily compensable, it doesn't make what you're doing morally or ethically right.

Bottom line: before doing anything like this: ask yourself how much your honour is worth. Can you really put a price on it? Not meaning to be melodramatic, but this is the way I feel.

BTW, when I use "you", I'm assuming you're speaking of yourself. If you're quoting a third party example, I withdraw the second person pronoun - but what I said applies to him/her, of course.

 

[Vid]

if a person sign a letter of appointment with a new coy, start date of employment is one month later. but for some reason, on the 3rd week (one week to start date of new job), decides he does not want to join, what are his exposure?

 

MOM website say nothing in the MOM law applies cuz the employer/ employee relationship havent start. but coy has every right to persue civil claims.

 

question is how often does this happen? any HR expert here...?

 

Unless you are in a high level appointment, most companies will not pursue because of the high cost involved in legal tussle.

 

Then again, as a matter of principle, it is not a nice thing to do. How would the new employer see this person who jumps ship whenever the opportunity arises?

[Adrianli]

I did that before. Agree to work for company A and they waited for me for three months. After two months, I told them I do not wish to work for them. They just said ok and thatz it.

 

My colleague joined them n quit after a year. Told me that company was like sh!t n told me lucky I did not join.

[Porker]

if a person sign a letter of appointment with a new coy, start date of employment is one month later. but for some reason, on the 3rd week (one week to start date of new job), decides he does not want to join, what are his exposure?

 

MOM website say nothing in the MOM law applies cuz the employer/ employee relationship havent start. but coy has every right to persue civil claims.

 

question is how often does this happen? any HR expert here...?

 

Never encountered such a situation but may I suggest you talk it out with the employer. Do it the gentleman way even if you have decided to renege on the offer.

[Darryn]

By no means am I a HR expert. But I would never advocate this. I'm not even looking at it from a legal standpoint - more of a "matter of honour" standpoint. You've already given your word (and bound it with your signature) to join this company. They've taken your word at good faith, and stopped looking for other candidates, probably already told the other applicants "position's filled, best of luck elsewhere". Now you play them out like this. Think about how it would feel if the company did the same to you. You've tendered notice to your old employer, or already quit outright, and the new company pulls out the safety net from under you. Wouldn't you be aggrieved?

 

I'm sure, if the situation was reversed, you would pursue a legal claim. Probably the company has a similar right (breach of contract), but whether they choose to do so or not depends on whether they have other ready applicants in the pipeline and how much trouble they want to go through over you. But even if it's legally not readily compensable, it doesn't make what you're doing morally or ethically right.

 

Bottom line: before doing anything like this: ask yourself how much your honour is worth. Can you really put a price on it? Not meaning to be melodramatic, but this is the way I feel.

 

BTW, when I use "you", I'm assuming you're speaking of yourself. If you're quoting a third party example, I withdraw the second person pronoun - but what I said applies to him/her, of course.

 

This deserves praises -

 

Except that I think there's one thing I feel like you're not considering (or perhaps not giving enough weight to).

That's the power disparity between the employer and the employee. In most cases, an employee not turning up for work is not going to "sink" the employer - but the reverse does not hold true.

 

This doesn't excuse "honour" or anything else....it should just be considered