Is lying to get “gardening leave” fraud?Leave pay - UK.Fraud or just forgeryNoncompete, nonsolicit, nondisclose agreement company that was sold. But wait, there's moreWhat is the difference between civil fraud and criminal fraud?Can a Recruitment Officer be sued for working for another company of the same industry as his former one?Am I experiencing an anti-trust violation?“due process” hearing concerning returning to work after medical leaveWhat is the differences between lying and fraud?Employment termination and pay backCan I sue my employer for wrongful firing?
Does this website provide consistent translation into Wookiee?
logo selection for poster presentation
Why does this pattern in powers happen?
What is the Ancient One's mistake?
Why doesn't a particle exert force on itself?
Would the rotation of the starfield from a ring station be too disorienting?
Is there an application which does HTTP PUT?
Why are thrust reversers not used down to taxi speeds?
get unsigned long long addition carry
mini sub panel?
Gift for mentor after his thesis defense?
"I can't place her": How do Russian speakers express this idea colloquially?
Two (probably) equal real numbers which are not proved to be equal?
What is the oldest instrument ever?
When was it publicly revealed that a KH-11 spy satellite took pictures of the first Shuttle flight?
Magical Modulo Squares
What are my options legally if NYC company is not paying salary?
Align a table column at a specific symbol
How is it believable that Euron could so easily pull off this ambush?
Capturing the entire webpage with WebExecute's CaptureImage
Illegal assignment from Id to List
Why is it wrong to *implement* myself a known, published, widely believed to be secure crypto algorithm?
Company stopped paying my salary. What are my options?
Can a character shove an enemy who is already prone?
Is lying to get “gardening leave” fraud?
Leave pay - UK.Fraud or just forgeryNoncompete, nonsolicit, nondisclose agreement company that was sold. But wait, there's moreWhat is the difference between civil fraud and criminal fraud?Can a Recruitment Officer be sued for working for another company of the same industry as his former one?Am I experiencing an anti-trust violation?“due process” hearing concerning returning to work after medical leaveWhat is the differences between lying and fraud?Employment termination and pay backCan I sue my employer for wrongful firing?
A group of my friends was celebrating one of our group securing a new job, and he was complaining about having to continue working at his old job for his 3 month notice period, we started discussing humorous ways that he could force his company to immediately terminate his contract.
One of the group mentioned that his company had a policy for employees who had accepted a role with a competitor of immediately escorting the employee off the premises and placing them on gardening leave.
Assuming my employer had a similar policy, and I secured a role with company A (who aren’t a competitor of my current employer), but I told my manager that I had secured a role with company B (who are a competitor) in an attempt to secure gardening leave. Have I committed fraud?
united-kingdom employment fraud
edited Apr 29 at 16:48
feetwet♦
14.9k945102
asked Apr 29 at 7:45
BenBen
11614
|
show 8 more comments
A group of my friends was celebrating one of our group securing a new job, and he was complaining about having to continue working at his old job for his 3 month notice period, we started discussing humorous ways that he could force his company to immediately terminate his contract.
One of the group mentioned that his company had a policy for employees who had accepted a role with a competitor of immediately escorting the employee off the premises and placing them on gardening leave.
Assuming my employer had a similar policy, and I secured a role with company A (who aren’t a competitor of my current employer), but I told my manager that I had secured a role with company B (who are a competitor) in an attempt to secure gardening leave. Have I committed fraud?
united-kingdom employment fraud
edited Apr 29 at 16:48
feetwet♦
14.9k945102
asked Apr 29 at 7:45
BenBen
11614
30
"I'm planning to lie in order to achieve a financial advantage, is that fraud?". - Yes, this is the textbook definition of fraud.
– Richard
Apr 29 at 17:22
7
"lying to get [...]" is pretty much fraud.
– Koray Tugay
Apr 29 at 18:07
9
Well, you are under no obligation to inform them you have accepted a role at either A or B - I'd frame it as "I will neither confirm nor deny my new employer - due to a non-disclosure agreement." (which is an agreement you can make with your wife or your friend - doesn't have to be a company) And then - simply because you could be employed at company B, they should in theory have to "garden leave" you.
– Stian Yttervik
Apr 29 at 21:17
3
Lying would be fraud, but unless the leaving employee is obliged to tell who is his new employer, not telling and not clearing the suspicion that he could be working for a direct competitor could be enough.
– Pere
Apr 29 at 22:23
4
@Acccumulation - "an intentional misrepresentation of material existing fact made by one person to another with knowledge of its falsity and for the purpose of inducing the other person to act, and upon which the other person relies with resulting injury or damage." - Stripped of lawyer-talk, that's precisely what it means
– Richard
Apr 29 at 23:30
|
show 8 more comments
A group of my friends was celebrating one of our group securing a new job, and he was complaining about having to continue working at his old job for his 3 month notice period, we started discussing humorous ways that he could force his company to immediately terminate his contract.
One of the group mentioned that his company had a policy for employees who had accepted a role with a competitor of immediately escorting the employee off the premises and placing them on gardening leave.
Assuming my employer had a similar policy, and I secured a role with company A (who aren’t a competitor of my current employer), but I told my manager that I had secured a role with company B (who are a competitor) in an attempt to secure gardening leave. Have I committed fraud?
united-kingdom employment fraud
edited Apr 29 at 16:48
feetwet♦
14.9k945102
asked Apr 29 at 7:45
BenBen
11614
A group of my friends was celebrating one of our group securing a new job, and he was complaining about having to continue working at his old job for his 3 month notice period, we started discussing humorous ways that he could force his company to immediately terminate his contract.
One of the group mentioned that his company had a policy for employees who had accepted a role with a competitor of immediately escorting the employee off the premises and placing them on gardening leave.
Assuming my employer had a similar policy, and I secured a role with company A (who aren’t a competitor of my current employer), but I told my manager that I had secured a role with company B (who are a competitor) in an attempt to secure gardening leave. Have I committed fraud?
united-kingdom employment fraud
united-kingdom employment fraud
edited Apr 29 at 16:48
feetwet♦
14.9k945102
asked Apr 29 at 7:45
BenBen
11614
edited Apr 29 at 16:48
feetwet♦
14.9k945102
asked Apr 29 at 7:45
BenBen
11614
edited Apr 29 at 16:48
feetwet♦
14.9k945102
edited Apr 29 at 16:48
feetwet♦
14.9k945102
edited Apr 29 at 16:48
feetwet♦
14.9k945102
14.9k945102
asked Apr 29 at 7:45
BenBen
11614
asked Apr 29 at 7:45
BenBen
11614
asked Apr 29 at 7:45
BenBen
11614
11614
30
"I'm planning to lie in order to achieve a financial advantage, is that fraud?". - Yes, this is the textbook definition of fraud.
– Richard
Apr 29 at 17:22
7
"lying to get [...]" is pretty much fraud.
– Koray Tugay
Apr 29 at 18:07
9
Well, you are under no obligation to inform them you have accepted a role at either A or B - I'd frame it as "I will neither confirm nor deny my new employer - due to a non-disclosure agreement." (which is an agreement you can make with your wife or your friend - doesn't have to be a company) And then - simply because you could be employed at company B, they should in theory have to "garden leave" you.
– Stian Yttervik
Apr 29 at 21:17
3
Lying would be fraud, but unless the leaving employee is obliged to tell who is his new employer, not telling and not clearing the suspicion that he could be working for a direct competitor could be enough.
– Pere
Apr 29 at 22:23
4
@Acccumulation - "an intentional misrepresentation of material existing fact made by one person to another with knowledge of its falsity and for the purpose of inducing the other person to act, and upon which the other person relies with resulting injury or damage." - Stripped of lawyer-talk, that's precisely what it means
– Richard
Apr 29 at 23:30
|
show 8 more comments
30
"I'm planning to lie in order to achieve a financial advantage, is that fraud?". - Yes, this is the textbook definition of fraud.
– Richard
Apr 29 at 17:22
7
"lying to get [...]" is pretty much fraud.
– Koray Tugay
Apr 29 at 18:07
9
Well, you are under no obligation to inform them you have accepted a role at either A or B - I'd frame it as "I will neither confirm nor deny my new employer - due to a non-disclosure agreement." (which is an agreement you can make with your wife or your friend - doesn't have to be a company) And then - simply because you could be employed at company B, they should in theory have to "garden leave" you.
– Stian Yttervik
Apr 29 at 21:17
3
Lying would be fraud, but unless the leaving employee is obliged to tell who is his new employer, not telling and not clearing the suspicion that he could be working for a direct competitor could be enough.
– Pere
Apr 29 at 22:23
4
@Acccumulation - "an intentional misrepresentation of material existing fact made by one person to another with knowledge of its falsity and for the purpose of inducing the other person to act, and upon which the other person relies with resulting injury or damage." - Stripped of lawyer-talk, that's precisely what it means
– Richard
Apr 29 at 23:30
30
30
"I'm planning to lie in order to achieve a financial advantage, is that fraud?". - Yes, this is the textbook definition of fraud.
– Richard
Apr 29 at 17:22
"I'm planning to lie in order to achieve a financial advantage, is that fraud?". - Yes, this is the textbook definition of fraud.
– Richard
Apr 29 at 17:22
7
7
"lying to get [...]" is pretty much fraud.
– Koray Tugay
Apr 29 at 18:07
"lying to get [...]" is pretty much fraud.
– Koray Tugay
Apr 29 at 18:07
9
9
Well, you are under no obligation to inform them you have accepted a role at either A or B - I'd frame it as "I will neither confirm nor deny my new employer - due to a non-disclosure agreement." (which is an agreement you can make with your wife or your friend - doesn't have to be a company) And then - simply because you could be employed at company B, they should in theory have to "garden leave" you.
– Stian Yttervik
Apr 29 at 21:17
Well, you are under no obligation to inform them you have accepted a role at either A or B - I'd frame it as "I will neither confirm nor deny my new employer - due to a non-disclosure agreement." (which is an agreement you can make with your wife or your friend - doesn't have to be a company) And then - simply because you could be employed at company B, they should in theory have to "garden leave" you.
– Stian Yttervik
Apr 29 at 21:17
3
3
Lying would be fraud, but unless the leaving employee is obliged to tell who is his new employer, not telling and not clearing the suspicion that he could be working for a direct competitor could be enough.
– Pere
Apr 29 at 22:23
Lying would be fraud, but unless the leaving employee is obliged to tell who is his new employer, not telling and not clearing the suspicion that he could be working for a direct competitor could be enough.
– Pere
Apr 29 at 22:23
4
4
@Acccumulation - "an intentional misrepresentation of material existing fact made by one person to another with knowledge of its falsity and for the purpose of inducing the other person to act, and upon which the other person relies with resulting injury or damage." - Stripped of lawyer-talk, that's precisely what it means
– Richard
Apr 29 at 23:30
@Acccumulation - "an intentional misrepresentation of material existing fact made by one person to another with knowledge of its falsity and for the purpose of inducing the other person to act, and upon which the other person relies with resulting injury or damage." - Stripped of lawyer-talk, that's precisely what it means
– Richard
Apr 29 at 23:30
|
show 8 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Yes, that would be fraud.
From the Fraud Act 2006:
2: Fraud by false representation
1) A person is in breach of this section if he—
(a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and
(b) intends, by making the representation—
(i) to make a gain for himself [...]
By saying that you had got a position with a competitor you would be dishonestly (i.e. you knew it was a lie) making a false representation. Your purpose was to obtain gardening leave, which is a gain for yourself.
answered Apr 29 at 9:52
Paul JohnsonPaul Johnson
2,569815
3
Not only is it a gain for the OP, but it is a loss for the business. The 3 month period offers the employer a chance to transition in an effective and smooth way. Just up and getting rid of somebody means that they have a hardship to fill that position and possibly train the replacement. There is a non-zero financial burden there.
– Ron Beyer
Apr 29 at 13:59
7
@RonBeyer True, but not necessary for an offence of fraud.
– Paul Johnson
Apr 29 at 14:17
7
@TimLymington: That seems to be a very narrow view of causation. Suppose a mugger says "you can give me all your money or you can fight me for it; I'm happy either way", would you then say that the victim's loss of his money was caused not by the mugging but by his voluntary decision not to fight back?
– Henning Makholm
Apr 29 at 18:37
11
@JohnDvorak thats a very US way of thinking - in the UK, the company can either hold the employee to their notice period, or place them on gardening leave for the duration of their notice period, or mutually agree an immediate end of the employment with a payment being made in lieu of the notice period by the company. The whole "walk them out the door" thing doesn't really happen in Europe, due to employment laws working in the employees favour - the employer cannot retaliate to a resignation with notice by firing the employee.
– Moo
Apr 29 at 21:44
2
@Ron: It is legal to quit, and you are then entitled to be paid for the notice period specified in your contract (typically a month). It is the company's choice whether to ask you to work that month (and e.g. hand over to your successor) or to stay at home on gardening leave. Either way, I see no reason for a lawsuit. As moo says, in Europe employees have as many rights as employers if not more.
– Tim Lymington
Apr 29 at 22:02
|
show 12 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "617"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f40532%2fis-lying-to-get-gardening-leave-fraud%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Yes, that would be fraud.
From the Fraud Act 2006:
2: Fraud by false representation
1) A person is in breach of this section if he—
(a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and
(b) intends, by making the representation—
(i) to make a gain for himself [...]
By saying that you had got a position with a competitor you would be dishonestly (i.e. you knew it was a lie) making a false representation. Your purpose was to obtain gardening leave, which is a gain for yourself.
answered Apr 29 at 9:52
Paul JohnsonPaul Johnson
2,569815
3
Not only is it a gain for the OP, but it is a loss for the business. The 3 month period offers the employer a chance to transition in an effective and smooth way. Just up and getting rid of somebody means that they have a hardship to fill that position and possibly train the replacement. There is a non-zero financial burden there.
– Ron Beyer
Apr 29 at 13:59
7
@RonBeyer True, but not necessary for an offence of fraud.
– Paul Johnson
Apr 29 at 14:17
7
@TimLymington: That seems to be a very narrow view of causation. Suppose a mugger says "you can give me all your money or you can fight me for it; I'm happy either way", would you then say that the victim's loss of his money was caused not by the mugging but by his voluntary decision not to fight back?
– Henning Makholm
Apr 29 at 18:37
11
@JohnDvorak thats a very US way of thinking - in the UK, the company can either hold the employee to their notice period, or place them on gardening leave for the duration of their notice period, or mutually agree an immediate end of the employment with a payment being made in lieu of the notice period by the company. The whole "walk them out the door" thing doesn't really happen in Europe, due to employment laws working in the employees favour - the employer cannot retaliate to a resignation with notice by firing the employee.
– Moo
Apr 29 at 21:44
2
@Ron: It is legal to quit, and you are then entitled to be paid for the notice period specified in your contract (typically a month). It is the company's choice whether to ask you to work that month (and e.g. hand over to your successor) or to stay at home on gardening leave. Either way, I see no reason for a lawsuit. As moo says, in Europe employees have as many rights as employers if not more.
– Tim Lymington
Apr 29 at 22:02
|
show 12 more comments
Yes, that would be fraud.
From the Fraud Act 2006:
2: Fraud by false representation
1) A person is in breach of this section if he—
(a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and
(b) intends, by making the representation—
(i) to make a gain for himself [...]
By saying that you had got a position with a competitor you would be dishonestly (i.e. you knew it was a lie) making a false representation. Your purpose was to obtain gardening leave, which is a gain for yourself.
answered Apr 29 at 9:52
Paul JohnsonPaul Johnson
2,569815
3
Not only is it a gain for the OP, but it is a loss for the business. The 3 month period offers the employer a chance to transition in an effective and smooth way. Just up and getting rid of somebody means that they have a hardship to fill that position and possibly train the replacement. There is a non-zero financial burden there.
– Ron Beyer
Apr 29 at 13:59
7
@RonBeyer True, but not necessary for an offence of fraud.
– Paul Johnson
Apr 29 at 14:17
7
@TimLymington: That seems to be a very narrow view of causation. Suppose a mugger says "you can give me all your money or you can fight me for it; I'm happy either way", would you then say that the victim's loss of his money was caused not by the mugging but by his voluntary decision not to fight back?
– Henning Makholm
Apr 29 at 18:37
11
@JohnDvorak thats a very US way of thinking - in the UK, the company can either hold the employee to their notice period, or place them on gardening leave for the duration of their notice period, or mutually agree an immediate end of the employment with a payment being made in lieu of the notice period by the company. The whole "walk them out the door" thing doesn't really happen in Europe, due to employment laws working in the employees favour - the employer cannot retaliate to a resignation with notice by firing the employee.
– Moo
Apr 29 at 21:44
2
@Ron: It is legal to quit, and you are then entitled to be paid for the notice period specified in your contract (typically a month). It is the company's choice whether to ask you to work that month (and e.g. hand over to your successor) or to stay at home on gardening leave. Either way, I see no reason for a lawsuit. As moo says, in Europe employees have as many rights as employers if not more.
– Tim Lymington
Apr 29 at 22:02
|
show 12 more comments
Yes, that would be fraud.
From the Fraud Act 2006:
2: Fraud by false representation
1) A person is in breach of this section if he—
(a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and
(b) intends, by making the representation—
(i) to make a gain for himself [...]
By saying that you had got a position with a competitor you would be dishonestly (i.e. you knew it was a lie) making a false representation. Your purpose was to obtain gardening leave, which is a gain for yourself.
answered Apr 29 at 9:52
Paul JohnsonPaul Johnson
2,569815
Yes, that would be fraud.
From the Fraud Act 2006:
2: Fraud by false representation
1) A person is in breach of this section if he—
(a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and
(b) intends, by making the representation—
(i) to make a gain for himself [...]
By saying that you had got a position with a competitor you would be dishonestly (i.e. you knew it was a lie) making a false representation. Your purpose was to obtain gardening leave, which is a gain for yourself.
answered Apr 29 at 9:52
Paul JohnsonPaul Johnson
2,569815
answered Apr 29 at 9:52
Paul JohnsonPaul Johnson
2,569815
answered Apr 29 at 9:52
Paul JohnsonPaul Johnson
2,569815
answered Apr 29 at 9:52
Paul JohnsonPaul Johnson
2,569815
2,569815
3
Not only is it a gain for the OP, but it is a loss for the business. The 3 month period offers the employer a chance to transition in an effective and smooth way. Just up and getting rid of somebody means that they have a hardship to fill that position and possibly train the replacement. There is a non-zero financial burden there.
– Ron Beyer
Apr 29 at 13:59
7
@RonBeyer True, but not necessary for an offence of fraud.
– Paul Johnson
Apr 29 at 14:17
7
@TimLymington: That seems to be a very narrow view of causation. Suppose a mugger says "you can give me all your money or you can fight me for it; I'm happy either way", would you then say that the victim's loss of his money was caused not by the mugging but by his voluntary decision not to fight back?
– Henning Makholm
Apr 29 at 18:37
11
@JohnDvorak thats a very US way of thinking - in the UK, the company can either hold the employee to their notice period, or place them on gardening leave for the duration of their notice period, or mutually agree an immediate end of the employment with a payment being made in lieu of the notice period by the company. The whole "walk them out the door" thing doesn't really happen in Europe, due to employment laws working in the employees favour - the employer cannot retaliate to a resignation with notice by firing the employee.
– Moo
Apr 29 at 21:44
2
@Ron: It is legal to quit, and you are then entitled to be paid for the notice period specified in your contract (typically a month). It is the company's choice whether to ask you to work that month (and e.g. hand over to your successor) or to stay at home on gardening leave. Either way, I see no reason for a lawsuit. As moo says, in Europe employees have as many rights as employers if not more.
– Tim Lymington
Apr 29 at 22:02
|
show 12 more comments
3
Not only is it a gain for the OP, but it is a loss for the business. The 3 month period offers the employer a chance to transition in an effective and smooth way. Just up and getting rid of somebody means that they have a hardship to fill that position and possibly train the replacement. There is a non-zero financial burden there.
– Ron Beyer
Apr 29 at 13:59
7
@RonBeyer True, but not necessary for an offence of fraud.
– Paul Johnson
Apr 29 at 14:17
7
@TimLymington: That seems to be a very narrow view of causation. Suppose a mugger says "you can give me all your money or you can fight me for it; I'm happy either way", would you then say that the victim's loss of his money was caused not by the mugging but by his voluntary decision not to fight back?
– Henning Makholm
Apr 29 at 18:37
11
@JohnDvorak thats a very US way of thinking - in the UK, the company can either hold the employee to their notice period, or place them on gardening leave for the duration of their notice period, or mutually agree an immediate end of the employment with a payment being made in lieu of the notice period by the company. The whole "walk them out the door" thing doesn't really happen in Europe, due to employment laws working in the employees favour - the employer cannot retaliate to a resignation with notice by firing the employee.
– Moo
Apr 29 at 21:44
2
@Ron: It is legal to quit, and you are then entitled to be paid for the notice period specified in your contract (typically a month). It is the company's choice whether to ask you to work that month (and e.g. hand over to your successor) or to stay at home on gardening leave. Either way, I see no reason for a lawsuit. As moo says, in Europe employees have as many rights as employers if not more.
– Tim Lymington
Apr 29 at 22:02
3
3
Not only is it a gain for the OP, but it is a loss for the business. The 3 month period offers the employer a chance to transition in an effective and smooth way. Just up and getting rid of somebody means that they have a hardship to fill that position and possibly train the replacement. There is a non-zero financial burden there.
– Ron Beyer
Apr 29 at 13:59
Not only is it a gain for the OP, but it is a loss for the business. The 3 month period offers the employer a chance to transition in an effective and smooth way. Just up and getting rid of somebody means that they have a hardship to fill that position and possibly train the replacement. There is a non-zero financial burden there.
– Ron Beyer
Apr 29 at 13:59
7
7
@RonBeyer True, but not necessary for an offence of fraud.
– Paul Johnson
Apr 29 at 14:17
@RonBeyer True, but not necessary for an offence of fraud.
– Paul Johnson
Apr 29 at 14:17
7
7
@TimLymington: That seems to be a very narrow view of causation. Suppose a mugger says "you can give me all your money or you can fight me for it; I'm happy either way", would you then say that the victim's loss of his money was caused not by the mugging but by his voluntary decision not to fight back?
– Henning Makholm
Apr 29 at 18:37
@TimLymington: That seems to be a very narrow view of causation. Suppose a mugger says "you can give me all your money or you can fight me for it; I'm happy either way", would you then say that the victim's loss of his money was caused not by the mugging but by his voluntary decision not to fight back?
– Henning Makholm
Apr 29 at 18:37
11
11
@JohnDvorak thats a very US way of thinking - in the UK, the company can either hold the employee to their notice period, or place them on gardening leave for the duration of their notice period, or mutually agree an immediate end of the employment with a payment being made in lieu of the notice period by the company. The whole "walk them out the door" thing doesn't really happen in Europe, due to employment laws working in the employees favour - the employer cannot retaliate to a resignation with notice by firing the employee.
– Moo
Apr 29 at 21:44
@JohnDvorak thats a very US way of thinking - in the UK, the company can either hold the employee to their notice period, or place them on gardening leave for the duration of their notice period, or mutually agree an immediate end of the employment with a payment being made in lieu of the notice period by the company. The whole "walk them out the door" thing doesn't really happen in Europe, due to employment laws working in the employees favour - the employer cannot retaliate to a resignation with notice by firing the employee.
– Moo
Apr 29 at 21:44
2
2
@Ron: It is legal to quit, and you are then entitled to be paid for the notice period specified in your contract (typically a month). It is the company's choice whether to ask you to work that month (and e.g. hand over to your successor) or to stay at home on gardening leave. Either way, I see no reason for a lawsuit. As moo says, in Europe employees have as many rights as employers if not more.
– Tim Lymington
Apr 29 at 22:02
@Ron: It is legal to quit, and you are then entitled to be paid for the notice period specified in your contract (typically a month). It is the company's choice whether to ask you to work that month (and e.g. hand over to your successor) or to stay at home on gardening leave. Either way, I see no reason for a lawsuit. As moo says, in Europe employees have as many rights as employers if not more.
– Tim Lymington
Apr 29 at 22:02
|
show 12 more comments
Thanks for contributing an answer to Law Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f40532%2fis-lying-to-get-gardening-leave-fraud%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
30
"I'm planning to lie in order to achieve a financial advantage, is that fraud?". - Yes, this is the textbook definition of fraud.
– Richard
Apr 29 at 17:22
7
"lying to get [...]" is pretty much fraud.
– Koray Tugay
Apr 29 at 18:07
9
Well, you are under no obligation to inform them you have accepted a role at either A or B - I'd frame it as "I will neither confirm nor deny my new employer - due to a non-disclosure agreement." (which is an agreement you can make with your wife or your friend - doesn't have to be a company) And then - simply because you could be employed at company B, they should in theory have to "garden leave" you.
– Stian Yttervik
Apr 29 at 21:17
3
Lying would be fraud, but unless the leaving employee is obliged to tell who is his new employer, not telling and not clearing the suspicion that he could be working for a direct competitor could be enough.
– Pere
Apr 29 at 22:23
4
@Acccumulation - "an intentional misrepresentation of material existing fact made by one person to another with knowledge of its falsity and for the purpose of inducing the other person to act, and upon which the other person relies with resulting injury or damage." - Stripped of lawyer-talk, that's precisely what it means
– Richard
Apr 29 at 23:30