How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Ben Jones Your Own Question
Ben Jones
Ben Jones, UK Lawyer
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 47424
Experience:  Qualified Solicitor - Please start your question with 'For Ben Jones'
29905560
Type Your Law Question Here...
Ben Jones is online now

Jones – new terms in employment contract (2). Is this

Resolved Question:

For Ben Jones – new terms in employment contract (2).
Is this normal within an employment contract?
What are the implications on Mr A?
Is this a get out clause for Company X to make Mr A redundant but at the same time employ a temporary/or fixed term contract worker to carry out this role? Essentially the role still exists.
Terms state:
“the Company may at any time: (a) appoint any person or persons to act jointly with you to discharge your duties and functions under this agreement; (b)engage another person as a temporary replacement for you and/or to carry out some or all of your duties on a temporary basis if you are suspended or unable properly to carry out some or all of your duties for any reason.”
Submitted: 1 year ago.
Category: Law
Expert:  Ben Jones replied 1 year ago.
Hello again, is this a term which is being introduced now, rather than a pre-existing one? I will be back later today to deal with this fully, thanks for your patience
Customer: replied 1 year ago.

For Mr A this is being introduced now. It was not in the initial contract Mr A signed when he started employment.

Expert:  Ben Jones replied 1 year ago.
Hello, I would not say that this is a common clause in an employment contract. Not one I have seen frequently anyway. Directly it does not allow them to make him redundant but the issue is if they decide to make the position one of job sharing, for example because the workload requires it, but eventually the workload reduces, they may find themselves in a position where there are two people doing the same job but not enough work for them both to do. That could prompt a redundancy exercise and his job could be jeopardised. This is part a) at least. For part b) it just covers situations where he is suspended or unable to carry out his duties such as through absence, illness, etc. So part b) is not much of a concern, but part a) could affect him in the future if it ends up being two people doing his job but later it is no longer necessary. I hope this has answered your query. I would be grateful if you could please take a second to leave a positive rating (3, 4 or 5 stars) as that is an important part of our process and recognises the time I have spent assisting you. If you need me to clarify anything before you go - please get back to me on here and I will assist further as best as I can. Thank you
Ben Jones and other Law Specialists are ready to help you