Non-Compete Can Be Imposed Mid-Employment with No New Consideration

Re:Non-Compete Can Be Imposed Mid-Employment with No New Con... by nxb on Monday August 17, 2015 @05:09PM (#10076145)

Shockingly, signature is often not actually required in the UK for changes to employment contracts. Sorry I can't find better sources at the moment, but this was recently ruled on again by the UK courts. No signature is required, simply remaining at the job is enough to constitute acceptance in the UK for employment contracts. The employers don't even to show any evidence that you were aware that the contract has been changed.

> Following on from this, a contract of employment does not need to be signed for it to be a binding agreement between the parties as acceptance of its terms can be either verbal or implied through conduct.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/experts/article-2715470/I...

Add to this, the UK courts are often upholding extremely unilateral employment contract clauses that give the employer the "right to change the contract without the employee's permission at any time." Extremely unilateral power. The UK courts see no problem with it at all. Quite insane.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Non-Compete Can Be Imposed Mid-Employment with No New Con... by matthewmacleod on Tuesday August 18, 2015 @05:37AM (#10078252)

Sure; see my other response regarding this. AFAIK implied acceptance of contract is actually common in UK law.

It would be good to see some examples of court upholding "extremely unilateral employment contract clauses that give the employer the 'right to change the contract without the employee's permission at any time.'" – not because I don't believe you, I'm just interested in where this is happening. Unfair employment contracts are a bit of a political issue right now.

[ Parent | on HN ]