(edit title) Quit a job before starting ...any legal consequences? Options

[elk200]

Hi everyone,

about a month ago I signed a contract for a job in Sweden which would start in a month. However, after signing, I received an offer from another company I had applied to - which is much better and would have been my first choice if they had been quicker to react.

The contract I have already signed states that either party needs to inform the other 3 months in advance about an employment termination. Could I be held liable to work for at least that time, even if I quit now before starting? Are there any other possible legal consequences?

Or could I just quit, take the other contract offer and be happy with it?

(Of course I don't expect to make the other employer very happy with that. My question is merely regarding legal consequences.)

Thanks in advance!

elk200

PS: If it is relevant legally: Both companies are Swedish ABs and registered in Sweden.

[Mo]

I think if you explain to the first company that you have had a better offer they are unlikely to try and enforce the contract. But legally I don't think you have a leg to stand on - so you will need to negotiate carefully - remembering to try not to make enemies

[PDX]

The contracts that I have signed in the past were always valid from first day of employment, i.e. could be terminated by either party without notice prior to the first day. It's nasty for either party when it does happen, but such is life

~~~PDX~~~

[Yorkshireman]

Check your employment contract carefully, if there is a provänställning duration, then the 3 months notice period is probably only valid once you have past that, or contracted to be 1 month or less during provanställning.

Remember, they have every right to be awkward, since they may have already vested time and money into the recruitment process that gave you the contract. However, who would want to keep an employee that says even now before starting that they do not want to work there. If indeed your notice period is 3 months, it would be a waste to hold onto You, train you somewhat, etc... when you are leaving. Unless, it is for a competitor .

Talk to the employer that gave You the contract, and explain to them carefully why you do not want the job. I am sure they will be very reasonable.

[elk200]

Thanks for the replies so far.

The contract I signed does not contain any regulations regarding "provänställning". Does that mean that a general Swedish law governs it now, or does that simply mean that the 3 months are relevant? Or is it like PDX said, that either party can just retreat from the contract prior to the first day of employment?

In which legal text can I perhaps find more details?

Thank you guys!

[Yorkshireman]

When an employment contract is signed it then is considered a normal contract and is covered by normal contract principles and law. Technically they could sue for damages, though unlikely they will unless you are going to a competitor

Basically, You are contracted to start, and can hand in notice directly, which means Your employer would also have to pay you for 3 months. And the reverse is the same, if the employer changes their mind, they are obliged to follow the contract and give your 3 months notice and pay accordingly.

This is why I said earlier ... talk to them, and basically agree to cancel the contract. In some cases it is simple, in others it is about agreeing a shorter notice period.

Does the contract include any clause about not working for any other employer for it's duration? If it does. then You must make sure that you have agreed with the employer before you start the other job!, if the periods overlap.

Most of the time employers dont want the fuss, and understand, so will willingly agree to cancel the contract.

[Gefle383]

You could go the the 2nd company and tell them that you're under contract with an employer and have to give them 3 months notice. In my experience employers will respect this. If they don't agree to this then as mentioned above you'll have to negotiate with care. You don't want to lose both job offers. Sorry I can't offer advice redarding the legal implications.

[John.Smith]

From an emloyers perspective it is not worth chasing you legally for it. They are more interested in finding a resource who will stay with them long term and are highly unlikely to force you to work 3 months notice.

In recruitment your situation happens and the HR dept will just shrug it off and and let you on your merry way. Call them and discuss it with them, I think you will find them reasonable but probably a bit pissed off..

[Puffin]

are you EU or non EU?

if you are not from the EU it could be tricky as your work permit only allows you to work for the company named - your new employer would have to apply for a new work permit

[gplusa]

Check that there is no Restraint of Trade clause which prevents you from immediately starting work for a competitor. Having said that, given that you have not started with the company it could be assumed that you have no inside knowledge of the company to take to a competitor. So that might be difficult for them to enforce if challenged.

Some companies employ Garden Leave tactics. Banks are the most common users. You don't have to work out your notice period but you remain employed by the company for that period, preventing you from jumping straight to a rival company. You get paid to "sit in the garden".

As PDX mentioned, you usually will have a start date written on your contract. That's the date that your employment takes effect from. Your salary, bonuses, annual leave, etc, are all calculated from that date. Prior to that date, you are not an employee of the company, you only have a mutual agreement to become an employee. So I don't think they could make you work out your notice should you cancel your contract prior to your start date. A shitty employer might seek compensation for breach of contract but they would have to show that they have incurred a physical loss in order to seek compensation as a direct result of you terminating your contract prior to your actual employment start date. More likely they will simply move on.

[Somebody]

by Swedish law isn't it 3months only when you work over 5 years and one 1 month when you work up to 5 years for the sam ecompany.This is what I've heard anyway.

[gplusa]

The more I think about this the more it appears as being an irrelevant concern. The OP is not yet employed by the company. He/she will not be employed by the company until the agreed start date. Therefore, any conditions of employment, such as hours of work, place of work, payment of salary, holiday pay, sick pay, and length of required termination, will not apply until the date that the OP actually starts work as an employee. They don't have to give 3 months notice as they haven't yet started working.

The OP and the future employer have a contract to become employer/employee from a fixed future date. If the OP walks away before that date without the agreement of the future employer, they are in breach of contract. Possibly. The future employer could seek compensation for any costs incurred between the date the contract was formed (the date that the OP said yes to the employer's offer) and the date of contract termination. It would have to be a specific loss directly relating to the OP, such as maybe the cost of having business cards printed but you could argue that the employer took the risk in having business cards printed for a future employee prior to that person being officially employed. I can't see any employer, except maybe for Dave, being that silly.

The OP is entitled to walk away today without being bound by the 3 months termination period contained within their future employment contract.

[Yorkshireman]

The OP is entitled to walk away today without being bound by the 3 months termination period contained within their future employment contract.

Not so.

A contract is a contract! Whilst the OP is not yet employed, if the contract they have both signed says He is supposed to start work, say 1st July, then he is bound by that. The terms and conditions come into effect from that date. To not turn up for work is effectively breaking the contract, which could make him liable to pay damages, if the prospective employer chases it.

Think of it the other way around. You have an employment contract, you quite your current job based upon that. If it was no issue to walk away, the employer without penalty could just withdraw it. Your in the pooh, no job. And it does happen. One can sue for damages when that happens, it is normally for the contracted notice period. This is one of the reasons an employer should always try to get provanställning written into the start of employment, so the notice period and potential damages if they break the contract is far less, as notice periods are far less. Plus all the other reasons for provanställning

OP must talk with the company He signed a contract with. Normally they are understanding, happens very often, they wouldn't want to have to pay someone for 3 months notice when they were looking for someone more long term.

Remember, You do not know how much they have spent in advertising the position, time it takes to interview, if an agency was used there are the fees ... and the agency itself may have lost additional payments (sometimes the fee is based upon someone staying for a minimum of 6+ months etc...)

To just not turn up, starts to burn future bridges also

Talk to them, and agree to cancel the contract before it starts.

[gplusa]

I think we'll have to agree to disagree there, Yorkshireman. In my opinion, the OP is not bound by any of the conditions of his employment contract, including that of termination notice, as he is not currently employed by the company. And therefore not bound by that contract. He does not currently have a place of work within the company, hours of work, and he is not drawing a salary. He doesn't get paid if he suddenly comes down with the cold between now and when he starts work. All those employment conditions will come into effect on the day that he offically becomes employed by the company. Which he currently is not.

Should he simply not turn up for work on Day One, then you are quite correct and he would be required to give the agreed amount of termination notice. The clock starts ticking from the moment his employment takes effect. The contract to provide future employment terminates, and the contract to employ commences. No arguments there. He needs to advise his future employer that he intends to break the contract entered into where he is to commence employment but, unless there is a miminum notice period stipulated on THAT contract, he is entitled to break that contract at any time. Once he commences employment, the contract to provide future employment is cancelled and his new employment contract commences. We're talking about 2 different contracts, running consecutively, each with their own conditions. The conditions for one contract do not transfer to another contract.

Damages are another issue, and I agree with you about that. Recovery of any costs directly relating to the agreement to provide employment from the date that agreement was signed until the the date the agreement ends (and the employment contract commences) could be sought. That can't include recruitment costs as those costs were incurred prior to any agreement to employ being signed. No contract exists between the applicant and the employer with regard to recruitment costs. That's the employer's risk. I would go further and say that an employer couldn't claim for the costs of readvertising etc. otherwise we'd all be sued for costs for replacing our position if we left our current employment. It also can't include for generic costs, such as buying a new computer, as the employer still the opportunity to give that computer to the person who eventually does fill that position. I agree that the future employee would have a case should the agreement to employ contract be terminated by the future employer and the employee is unable to retain his current position.

It's all a bit academic, albeit an interesting discussion. I'm sure that by now the OP has telephoned the employer and advised him that unfortunately he will no longer be able to take them up on their generous offer, and wishes the company well in the future.

I actually had to do exactly the same thing a few years back, which I'd forgotten about until now. I was offered a position, accepted the offer, and then withdrew my acceptance a few days later. Due to changes with the organistion structure within my current place of employment. A couple of years later the same postion was advertised again, I applied a second time, was offered (a second time) and accepted the position. I have to say that I did quite rightly get a thorough grilling by the interview panel about why I had turned down their offer previously and was I about to piss them around this time. Which was a fair enough question, and one I was expecting.

As an employer I've been made use of a couple of times by candidates who have used a job offer from me to negotiate a better offer with their current employer. Annoying, but not uncommon. The joys of employment.

[PDX]

To summarize:

Employment contracts are special contracts in that they come into effect from the first date of employment. Not a single day before that (in civilized countries, at least ).

~~~PDX~~~