Re posted from Consumer Forum - Employment Problem ..Unfair Dismissal

[et62]

I am a fairly new member and was recommended to the site by a friend.

 

I have read some of the posts re employment problems and am very impressed by the feedback given by the likes of SarEl.

 

Rather stupidly I did not realise that there is a separate sub forum that addresses employment problems and thus this post has been re-posted.

 

I have the following query :

 

I am employed on a full time basis by a law firm and have been continuously employed for 3 years. After one year of employment i was fortunate enough to be given a training contract to become a qualified solicitor. My training contract ends on 1 April 2011 and i will then be a qualified solicitor. That's the good news !

 

During my training contract the law firm has however experienced many changes and for various reasons my face no longer fits in the organisation. Consequently three weeks ago I was verbally advised by my employer that once qualified my services as a Solicitor will not be required and they will be "releasing" me on April 1.

 

I have received nothing in writing, but the firm's partners have informed several staff that i am leaving. I have neither acknowledged or accepted their verbal statement that I am going to have to leave. Since the express statement referenced above I have not had any other meeting with my employer. i have not raised a grievance regarding the matter because I fear that it will not be given serious consideration.

 

I presume that their actions to date are procedurally flawed in respect of employment law, an area of law in which i incidentally have no formal training. There is no wording in my training contract which states that i could be automatically released/ dismissed at the end of the training contract and thus i presume that my employment contract takes precedent.

 

I presume, therefore, that in order to dismiss me my employer must comply with relevant employment law and if they wish to get rid of me they must either follow a disciplinary process potentially culminating in dismissal ; i do have a written warning dated 10/10 for a vexatious allegation that I elected not to contest . Alternatively there are rumours that as part of an upcoming reorganisation the firm may be considering some staff redundancies and thus i could be shortlisted, albeit subjectively which i am aware is potentially unlawful, and ultimately dismissed The firm is busy, but in the past month i have been given no work and thus am virtually idle.

 

I cannot believe that a medium sized law firm ( 75 staff) would be dumb enough just to boot me out , but who knows !

 

Any feedback on my options and / or a strategy to protect my employment status would be appreciated.

 

Regards

[honeybee13]

Hello and welcome to the forum. I'm a bit confused about whether you have one contract or two, having read your post. Are you saying there's another one that supercedes the training contract?

 

I'm sure SarEl and the others will have comments for you, but I know that professional firms of lawyers and accountants often don't keep newly qualified trainees.

 

My best, HB

[SarEl]

Yes, lawyers do make mistakes obviously. We are all human too (allthough some people would dispute that ). However, I fear that this is probably one that you will need to take to an employment lawyer! Broadly speaking, training contracts are, as HB has suggested, limited to the period of training with no commitment to employment when qualified. The fact that it does not specifically state this does not mean it isn't the case, and the training contract may well have superseded any prior contract. I am not familiar with the ones used by solicitors, although I do know it isn't uncommon to let trainees go when they qualify. Our own are rather different, and as such do not give employment rights after the period of training - but the two situations are very different and people in training know that. Having had a quick look at the SRA site, it does have a model training contract on it that specifically stipulates that the training contract is for two years only, and that the training contract overrides any existing contract where there is a conflict of terms. That would tend to indicate that it can be treated as a fixed term contract, since the job that you had previously was, one has to assume, for someone who is not qualified. Now that you are, there appears to be no job for a qualified solicitor, and this would appear to be a redundancy situation. But as I said, I really don't know very much about how training contracts for solicitors work. I will try to see if one of my colleagues can advise, if possible.

 

However, despite only having been told this verbally, you are not really helping yourself by failing to at least question this, if not raise a grievance (which you really must if there is any case to be argued at all). So I think that would be my starting point - asking the questions of the employer formally, and then getting an hours advice on the situation when you have them. I hope this helps.

[Batfink]

I know that at all legal firms I've worked at (over ten years) all trainees have been on fixed term contracts for the duration of their TC, even when they've been employed before (as a paralegal, for example). If they're taken on at qualification (which is NEVER guaranteed), their period of continuous employment is from the first date they originally started with the firm, not the start of either the TC or at the point of qualification. One lawyer I know started as an NQ and received the "extra" five days' holiday you got for being employed for over five years.

[Ganymede]

I'm currently in the middle of my TC and I there was a long article in the Gazette a while ago that talked about this.

 

From memory I think it said that TCs are fixed term contracts and the firm is not under an obligation to keep you on when you qualify or pay redundancy if they let you go.

 

Might be worth giving it a Google.

[elche]

I know that at all legal firms I've worked at (over ten years) all trainees have been on fixed term contracts for the duration of their TC, even when they've been employed before (as a paralegal, for example). If they're taken on at qualification (which is NEVER guaranteed), their period of continuous employment is from the first date they originally started with the firm, not the start of either the TC or at the point of qualification. One lawyer I know started as an NQ and received the "extra" five days' holiday you got for being employed for over five years.

 

Hi et62,

 

Firstly, BE HAPPY, you got a TC (and found this great site!) - many people fail to even get that far.

 

Secondly, my experience (in small firms) is that most trainee's are dismissed after their TC - what small ER wants to pay qualified wages when then can get another trainee (or indeed paralegal) for 10 grand less?

 

Thirdly, your ER (as sarel points out) may well have used the SRA or (as was) the law society's standard TC. I'm sure (from what I recall) that this in effect created a fixed-term employment contract for the purpose of your training as a sol to comply with law society (or SRA)'s guidelines for the training of trainees. Thus, once they do this, their obligations under said contract effectively cease (at least at common law).

 

The termination of a FT contract is technically a 'dismissal'. Thus the ER should still follow a fair procedure. The below is 'over and above' min requirements BUT for example your ER may have:

 

1) Wrote to you inviting you to a meeting explaining that it was about the termination of your FT contract, bring a friend etc.

2) Hold said meeting explain reason for dismissal explore re-deployment opportunities etc

3) Write and tell you you are dismissed due to non-renewal of contract as per reasons discussed at meeting -- Due notice given -- ROA to a different partner etc.

4) You appeal -

5) New partner says decision stands.

 

If they follow the above, then you probably were not unfairly dismissed. In fact they could probably get away with a lot less.

 

My advice - you are on a FT training contract - if they don't want you, and follow a fair procedure, there is very little you can do. You cannot force someone to employ you!

 

I recall the job market for NQ much better than trainees - not sure how it is now or what area you want - but best of luck in the job search

 

Che

[et62]

News update on my protracted saga with a Midlands based law firm. It appears that my gut feeling was correct and my pre-existing employment contract takes precedent over the standard SRA training contract. Clearly such protection is unlikely to apply in respect of trainees who join a law firm under a two year fixed term training contract. Somewhat bizarrely my employer's Managing Partner has suggested that I raise a grievance and regardless has invited me to a meeting for a "chat".