Every Monday in our Money blog, we get an expert to answer your financial problems or consumer disputes. This week, a reader questioned if their boss’s decision to withhold her final weeks of pay was allowed.
A reader called Zippy asks: “I refused to work my two weeks’ notice due to bullying at work by my manager. Now he is refusing to pay me for my last four weeks of work because of my refusal. Is he allowed to do this?”
We asked Antony O’Loughlin, head of litigation and a director at Setfords solicitors, to take this query, and he said the simple answer is no.
No employer can withhold pay simply as “punishment”, he says.
Antony adds: “Even if your manager feels that he should not pay your two weeks’ notice period (which you could potentially challenge if the bullying you mentioned constitutes unlawful harassment) you have an absolute right to be paid for the work you have done.
“So, withholding four weeks’ worth of salary is very unlikely to be unlawful.
“If you want to pursue this you could start by contacting your employer (perhaps someone higher up than your immediate manager, if that’s possible) and requesting that they pay you for the work you’ve done or make a payment in lieu of your notice period, failing which you will raise a formal grievance.”
More on Money
Related Topics:
Antony says there is also the option to use the early conciliation process at ACAS, which is a free service for employees to try and resolve issues with their employers.
Through the service, ACAS will talk to both the claimant and the respondent about the dispute and give them a chance to come to an agreement without having to go to tribunal.
Advertisement
“If all of this fails you may have potential claims you could bring in an employment tribunal or court for harassment and breach of the terms of your employment contract,” Antony says.
“It’s always good to put everything in writing and keep all evidence of your communications with the company.”
The employer would ordinarily be able to withhold pay for any period where their employee has refused to work – but the alleged bullying and harassment is a “complicating factor” here, Antony says.
“If the employer is sensible, they will understand the risk of a potential harassment claim (assuming the alleged bullying is sufficient to constitute unlawful harassment) and may agree to a payment in lieu of notice (PILON) for the two-weeks’ notice period.”
Antony continues: “The employer could try and defend any claim for the notice pay on the basis that no work was done (if they wanted to deny liability for bullying or harassment).”
This feature is not intended as financial advice – the aim is to give an overview of the things you should think about. Submit your dilemma or consumer dispute via:
The Queen is unwell with a chest infection and has withdrawn from her engagements this week, Buckingham Palace has announced.
A palace spokesperson said Camilla’s doctors “have advised a short period of rest” and added that “with great regret, Her Majesty has therefore had to withdraw from her engagements for this week”.
They added the Queen “very much hopes to be recovered in time to attend this weekend’s Remembrance events as normal”.
“She apologises to all those who may be inconvenienced or disappointed as a result,” they said.
It is understood the Queen is currently resting at home and is under doctor’s supervision.
Birgitte, the Duchess of Gloucester, has stepped in on Camilla’s behalf to attend the annual opening of the Field of Remembrance at Westminster Abbey on Thursday.
The Queen has also withdrawn from a Buckingham Palace reception for Olympic and Paralympic athletes hosted by the King on the same evening.
A proposed ban on vaping and smoking in pub gardens will not go ahead, the health secretary has confirmed.
Wes Streeting said the Labour government would not press ahead with the idea after it was floated over the summer and caused an outcry within the hospitality industry.
The ban would have covered smoking in outdoor restaurants and outside sports venues, hospitals, nightclubs, and in some small parks.
But speaking to Sky News this morning, Mr Streeting confirmed the U-turn and said: “We’re not going ahead or not proposing to go ahead with a [smoking] ban on outdoor hospitality.”
He said the policy idea was a “leak of government discussion” over the summer and promoted a “really good debate about whether or not it would be proportionate” when taking into account the public health benefits, but also the potential downsides.
“I think people know the UK hospitality sector has taken a battering in recent years,” he added.
“And we don’t want to add to their pressure – so we’re not proposing to go ahead with an outdoor hospitality ban at this time.”
Advertisement
However, Mr Streeting did say that the smoking ban would be extended to some outdoor spaces, including schools, hospitals and children’s playgrounds.
It comes as the government today introduces a “groundbreaking” bill that aims to create the “first-ever smoke-free generation”.
The Tobacco and Vapes bill, which was first introduced by Rishi Sunak but was dropped due to the general election, will prevent anyone who was born on or after 1 January 2009 from buying tobacco.
The policy to create a “smoke-free generation” was seen as a defining one of Mr Sunak‘s premiership and caused controversy within Tory ranks, particularly the more libertarian wing of the party.
The bill will also create limits on the sale and marketing of vapes to children, while separate environmental legislation will be introduced to ban the sale and supply of single-use vapes by next summer.
The health secretary said “clamping down on the scourge of youth vaping” with licensing, tougher enforcement and a ban on the marketing of vapes to children and young people was “happily, an area of broad cross-party consensus”.
“I first proposed the generational ban for children, when I was the shadow health secretary,” he said.
“To my delight and surprise, Rishi Sunak took it up as prime minister and Conservative leader.
“I hope that cross-party support will sustain a new leader of the Conservative Party, but we’ll find out in the coming weeks.”
A safety system was “blocked” during a fatal train crash in Powys, an initial investigation has found.
The Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) has published its initial findings into last month’s collision, in which one person died.
David Tudor Evans, 66, was described as a “lovely guy, full of life and enjoyment”.
A further 15 people were taken to hospital for treatment after the crash near Talerddig, police said.
The collision – at around 7.26pm on 21 October – involved the 6.31pm Transport for Wales service from Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth and the 7.09pm Transport for Wales service from Machynlleth to Shrewsbury.
The RAIB said the units were fitted with wheel slide protection systems – described as being similar to anti-lock braking systems in cars – and an automatic sanding system.
Sand is discharged automatically via hoses when a wheel slide is detected during braking – creating more friction at the wheel-rail interface.
The on-train data recorder shows the wheel slide started during braking and was also present after the driver made an emergency brake demand.
An inspection of the sanding system fitted to Aberystwyth-bound train 1J25 showed the leading vehicle’s sanding hoses were blocked.
Advertisement
The RAIB says they were apparently unable to discharge sand.
The ongoing investigation is also looking at the speed at which the trains were travelling when they collided.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Initial enquiries suggest the westbound train was travelling at a speed of between 15mph and 24mph, while the eastbound train was travelling at a speed of 6mph.
The RAIB says its investigation will look at the sequence of events which led to the crash.
As part of the probe, the agency will look at factors including the actions of those involved, the level of wheel-rail adhesion, and the behaviour of both trains during and after the crash.
In a joint statement, Transport for Wales and Network Rail said they have “fully cooperated” with the British Transport Police, the Office of Rail and Road and the Rail Accident Investigation Branch.
“As investigations are currently still ongoing, we’ll continue to work together with investigators to understand what happened and await the full conclusion and recommendations of the investigation,” a spokesperson said.
The spokesperson said safety was the “main priority” for both companies and they had “carried out enhanced checks to the trains and the railway line”.
“At this early stage of the investigation, it’s fundamental that we await the findings of the full report and show sensitivity towards our customers, colleagues, the local community and the families of those affected by the incident,” they added.