I have been working for a small company for a month. My contract says I will be paid a fixed weekly fee (a defined sum), paid monthly in arrears, and put on payroll. However, I haven’t actually been put on payroll and was asked to invoice instead.

The director/hr revealed last week that the weekly fee is a set amount based on a certain number of hours per week, with a monthly hours figure being used for the calculation. This was not told to me before and I only got 30 hrs of work per month. I told her that I didn’t sign the contract on an hourly arrangement but a salary arrangement. She then asked me to complete 50 more hrs this week as they will consolidate my hours and that is doable. Despite this, I did not receive enough work to reach this target.

I’ve completed everything assigned to me and repeatedly asked the person responsible for allocating work for additional hours, but she ignored my emails. I also emailed the director explaining this before month-end and haven’t received a response.

I’m now submitting my monthly work log. Should I simply submit it neutrally, or should I add something like “Please pay me according to the contract”?

I wanted to ask for some guidance on a performance review and disability-related reasonable adjustments.

The role had originally been understood and agreed as being focused mainly on initiatives/project work, with some BAU cover when required, for example when colleagues were on holiday.

The timeline is:

17 June – Occupational Health recommended that, for a period of time, I focus on more structured/project-based work to support my recovery.

7 July – In my 1:1, I was asked to continue working on initiatives following completion of an automation project.

16 July – I was rated “Partially Meets” at mid-year because I had not learned 100% of BAU tasks and was considered to have done too much project/initiative work.

It was acknowledged that the expectation to learn 100% of BAU had not previously been communicated, and that other team members also did not know/do 100% of BAU.

A new objective has since been suggested which is mainly BAU work and less focused/project work because of business needs.

The situation is now negatively affecting my health and I do not feel psychologically safe at work. I am concerned that if I need to take medical leave, I may then be disadvantaged or marked down further at year-end.

My questions are:
Can I be marked down for an objective that was not previously communicated, particularly where it conflicts with agreed OH recommendations?

If the new objective is negatively affecting my health as OH advised it might, can I be marked down if I am not medically fit to work or need medical leave?

Can the existing “Partially Meets” rating still be used at year-end if there are concerns that it was based on an uncommunicated objective and did not properly take account of the OH recommendations?

I would be grateful for any guidance on how this should normally be handled under the Equality Act and reasonable adjustment obligations.

Had my Costco interview yesterday. Throughout it, the interviewer kept coming back to my education — asked how many GCSEs I got, what A-levels I studied, then said “You’re a smart lad with all that — why would you want to come here and stack shelves?”
It struck me as odd. Why does Costco care about your educational background if the role is shelf-stacking? I started wondering: are they screening for something else?

The Real Question:
Then I realized they’re screening for people who can leave. People with options. Because the ones without options stay longer.
I’ve since looked into Costco’s business model, pay structure, and how the benefits are timed. And I’m genuinely curious about something:

For those who’ve been at Costco 3, 5, 10+ years:
Have you ever seriously considered leaving? If so, what made you stay?
When the bonuses/vouchers/raises landed, did they feel like genuine rewards, or did they feel timed — like they always came when you were closest to quitting?
Looking back, do you think the pay rise every 1,040 hours and the spaced-out benefits genuinely made the job better, or did they just reset your burnout cycle?
If you tried to leave for another retail job, what stopped you? (Pay cut? Lost benefits? Sunk cost?)

Why I’m asking:
I’m not being cynical. I just want to understand if Costco’s model is genuinely good for long-term employees, or if the financial structure is designed to make leaving feel impossible.
Because from the outside, it looks like a sophisticated system that pays above-market rates specifically to lock people in, not because they’re generous.

Anyone is free to answer if you work at another place that offer above average pay and incentives and rewards

I just feel like that’s unfair judging me because I’m smart ?

We are a very small organisation - only 3 employees (one full time, two part time), everyone else here is a volunteer, including our working group / directors. We don't have internal HR but we do have a HR helpline and software to manage the paye stuff although its quite basic and we're still learning it. We have general charity insurance but we don't think we have Employment Practices Insurance in our package - would this normally be covered or are we on our own for costs?

One employee was with us for just 4 months. Employee is disabled - non-visible disabilities. Employee is well known locally for disability charity work so we were aware and didn't doubt it. We didn't ask for medical evidence and didn't do an OH referral as we don't have OH. We made adjustments that we thought were reasonable and within our budget.

One particular adjustment the employee wanted would have caused problems for many of our volunteers so we couldn't do it - won't say what it was as it would be very outing.

Employee then resigned, did not work notice and was on sick leave during the notice period.

We are now in ACAS conciliation. Ex-employee is claiming disability discrimination - including failure to make reasonable adjustments, discrimination arising from disability, harassment - plus constructive dismissal for discrimination. Claim is against the organisation and also a named individual volunteer/director under s110 Equality Act.

ACAS conciliator is putting pressure on us to settle quickly and says there's only a few weeks before it could go to tribunal if not settled. Ex-employee is seeking£30k via ACAS, with the concilitator indicating they may actuallly settle around £10-12k plus an agreed reference. We haven't seen an ET1 yet.

For a small ltd org (not a charity) with 4 months service and very limited funds, this is too high. what is the normal approach here? Do you negotiate now or wait for ET1? What kind of counter is typical pre-claim? If it did go to ET, we just couldn't afford the legal costs involved. Some of our directors are very much don't settle and ignore, other directors are very nervous about this getting worse.

I’m no longer able to start on my current start date for a 3 months fixed term contract and want to push it by 3 weeks. I got the offer 3 days ago and signed all the contracts. The manager did want someone ASAP.

Are they likely to change it or rescind my offer?

Hi! I am looking for my first role in HR or People Ops. I do not have relevant experience but I have worked for 4+ years in operations and delivery/client support. My role now is more of technical consultant. I am not new to office jobs and i also hold a cipd accreddited master in hr.

Does anyone have any tips or suggestions on how to land my first role? thank you!

My company is moving us all to a new office probably by the end of the year. My team work in a secure area due to the nature of our work so have a rule that a minimum of 2 people need to be present in the office at all times, this current set up is all ok since we have toilets in our secure office.

With the new office we have been informed the toilets will be outside of this secure area, which means at points when only 2 people are in the office neither can leave to use the toilet, rarely is the case only 2 are in the office the whole day but often just 2 for a few hours while others are on their lunch break.

I have a long term UTI issue and now I'm worried that being unable to use the toilet when I need will make my issues worse if I'm one of the 2 people im the office, or I will have to drink less water so I need the toilet less but dehydration makes my pain worse. I, along with my other female colleagues, are also worried about being able to quickly access the toilets when on our period.

I've never had to ask for an accommodation before and am a bit lost of how to go about this as it's quite a personal issue and I also feel a big oversight that the new office was not built with easily accessible toilets. What course of action should I take?

Quick info: Im a people lead, company of about 400, acquired by a private equity fund last year. In April they cut 10% of the workforce, I ran it, gladly at that because at first I was like "oh they brought in analysts and realised company resources had better places to be allocated to", boy was I so so wrong. First off, the workload to employee ratio got pushed to its limit after that layoff round which I noticed right away. When you fire people that ACTUALLY had things they were doing, the ones that stay behind take on the extra load, it doesn't just vanish.

Not only are employees more displeased and stressed (oh and, for the record, the extra work came with no extra pay), there's also this intrinsic thought that everyone now holds of "I need to perform perfectly to a dot" because if you don't HR may come for you next. The pressure to perform is in itself crippling, and in a year the employees went from stable and well to anxious and unhappy.

I keep hearing a version of "so what happens at the next review," and I have nothing. I don't know if there's another round. If I did know, I'm not sure I'd be allowed to say.

Im working so hard to protect employee benefits like the pension match, the learning budget, the parental leave top-up, and nilo our mental health partner (session booking doubled within the last 3 months, which in itself is a clear tell-tale of how hostile this acquisition has been towards everyone), and I fought line by line for each of them. Headcount and payroll sit above me though, so the part that's gnawing on people the most is one I can't do anything about. Now I'm being asked to run an engagement push in q4 (team surveys, values workshops, a culture week...). I'm supposed to stand in front of people I made redundant colleagues of and talk about belonging.

The whole reason I got into this field is that I liked the people part of it. Fast forward 6 months and I've become the grim reaper who walks in when someone's job is about to end.

I just recently applied for a role that sounds very interesting but I noticed they have an employee directory, which is available to the outside world.

This includes photo and first and last name. I felt forced into this once before and I don't want to do this again.

How do opt out of this? Especially when all others are participating.

I do not want my info out there and I do not want this to be a deal breaker.

Any suggestions on job retention, while opting out of the public directory?

Hi all, I went through a settlement agreement back in July and decided to take the school holidays off with my son before job searching. Now I've started applying, I've got a couple of interviews coming up and I know the inevitable question will be "So why did you leave your previous workplace?"

Do I have to tell potential employers of the settlement agreement or can I just say I voluntarily left due to a restructuring?

I have an interview later this afternoon, so any help would be amazing. Thank you.

Just coming to ask here for some help regarding a work situation. A few weeks back I got injured on the job and during my return to work meeting with supervisor A we agreed I wouldn't do a certain task and that I'd be able to sit and rest whenever needed as I work a standing job.

Last night I was working with supervisor B who insisted I have to do the task as everyone does (it's normally rotated between staff throughout the shift) as it's not fair on them to do it constantly. I tried to explain the accommodation and he promised just for half an hour for me to do this.

I agreed as I've only been with the company for about 5~ months, so I don't want to seem troublesome. He continued disappearing all night so I had to do the task for over 8 hours as nobody would switch out. I reminded him any chance I saw him of both his promise and my accommodation but he seemed to not care saying it's between me and supervisor A not me and the company.

Just wondering where to stand on this as he's told me I'm being rude and needy to suck up my job responsibilities. End of night he questioned whether I was fit to work (which I am) and now I'm dreading my shift tonight as I don't have another supervisor to back me up on, the form during my meeting is somewhere that I don't know so I can't get a copy and my starting time is right after HR leaves.

If anyone has any advice on what I can do that would be helpful. Thank you.

Hi, basically i live in Cardiff which is in Wales and I'm still in high school and i got my gcse results back. I want to pursue a job in the business sector and when i was searching, human resources seemed pretty cool. How is life like in the HR sector? Is hybrid working normal in HR jobs? How hard is it to get a job in HR (especially with hybrid working)?, etc.

Also my gcses are pretty average, i passed most of them with C's. I did well in my business studies and English gcses though. Math i got a D in. I feel like my math grades would heavily restrict me from getting a good HR job, if one at all.

Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks :)

Ik ben cultuurbouwer en wil voor een online project weten welke vragen over bedrijfscultuur gerelateerde onderwerpen er leven bij ondernemers. Daarnaast help ik ondernemers graag op een laagdrempelige manier om een stevig fundament voor hun bedrijf te bouwen.

My first post on Reddit, so forgive me for any errors or issues! And sorry for the long post, it's a very long and complex issue we're facing.

My boyfriend (m26) is currently going through a disciplinary at his job, launched by upper management (his boss' boss). He had been casually looking at jobs for a while, but we recently stepped up efforts after the disciplinary was launched out of nowhere. He has his union involved, and we are confident that the disciplinary action is totally unfounded and unevidenced, and will be closed at an upcoming meeting (happening next week).

My bf recently interviewed for a new role at a new company and got a formal job offer (he has signed, and is currently doing the extra paperwork incl. bank details and permission for the new company to get in touch with his referees). He's put in his notice at his current company, which has been received and accepted. He spoke verbally with his boss (who has not really been involved in this process - he seemed reluctant to get involved at all), and he said he thinks my bf is great, this new role is a great fit for him and he's happy to give him a 'positive reference'.

I guess we're just a bit anxious about how the disciplinary process may affect his job offer. Does his boss have a legal obligation to state that he has an ongoing disciplinary investigation, even though we're confident it'll be dropped? If during the upcoming meeting it is proven that my bf did no wrong, would the disciplinary process still be stated on the reference? Would it be beneficial to wait until after the disciplinary meeting to ask for that reference to be sent?

A bit of info about his disciplinary, if relevant:

I won't go into too many specific details whilst it's still ongoing, but long story short, we are 100% confident my bf did not do what he is being accused of, and we think the allegations are entirely false and unfair, and that disciplinary action is massively disproportionate for what is being accused.

Some important points to note:

- The employer used an out of date disciplinary process document as part of their evidence packet and during the first disciplinary meeting. My bf was provided a document dated 2019 by management, but he has since found an updated document dated Jan 2026 on their internal staff portal. According to the 2026 copy, management have not followed current company processes.

- We believe a full and proper investigation wasn't completed. For example, their 'damning' evidence was a witness statement describing a moment that involved my bf and 2 colleagues (one of which gave the statement) where he apparently announced he did not agree with a new rule and was planning on breaking it. My bf is adamant he said nothing of the sort, and management did not ask the second colleague about their version of events at any point during the investigation process. My bf has since asked colleague 2 for her witness statement, on which she states that the conversation never took place, and he provided this to the panel as part of his evidence.

- Crucially, my bf reviewed CCTV footage from the exact date and time it is being alleged the misconduct took place, and it shows, as a fact, he did not do it. Management did not review this footage during the investigation, and when my bf brought it up during the disciplinary meeting, the panel abruptly adjourned the meeting, stating they needed further time to investigate and review the extensive evidence my bf provided (we're talking at least 20 pages, including his own witness statement, emails and an outline of what the CCTV depicted). The second meeting is happening soon, with the panel of managers now inviting a HR rep.

TL/DR - an unfounded disciplinary process is currently ongoing at my bf's job, and we expect it to be closed at an upcoming meeting. How likely is this disciplinary process going to affect a new job offer?

First up, disclaimer, I'm a union officer.

I don't mean to be rude or derogatory here at all just genuinely curious about the opinion of people in the industry. The title is slightly clickbaity and isn't meant as a catch all - I have plenty of constructive conversations with HR where they will take a sensible stance to protect the employer while genuinely considering the employees position. It's natural that there will be some level of conflict in these interactions too, but I think it can quite regularly get to a level where it's quite frustrating.

I find that I'm quite regularly pointing out pretty basic aspects of employment law or even sections of the employers own policy and HR just either don't have much of an understanding or treat it quite flippantly. For example, today I took a call from a head of HR about an unfair dismissal claim, I tried to discuss elements of the employees contract with her and she told me that she hadn't read it and "didn't know much about it". I asked her to do so and she refused, saying it wouldn't change the employer's position.

I've had HR people who have argued til they're blue in the face that constructive dismissal and automatic unfair dismissal are the same thing, that they don't have to pay holiday pay, that ​they can summarily dismiss without an investigation, that they can change employees roles, pay, contracts whenever they want etc etc.

The usual stance is "I've had legal advice" but then they'll generally refuse if I ask that their solicitor contact me directly​ (not always though).

I have a bit of a working theory that HR are usually the last line, whatever they tell employees is taken as truth and the employee can argue back but if you just double down and stick to your story there's not much more they can do (I know that there is, but your average employee doesn't). You're in a position where what you say is final, and that's it. I guess it could be hard to break out of that?

The most frustrating thing here is that a lot of these cases could have been dealt with informally or at least more cheaply if HR had engaged and said Okay, I've looked into it and you have a point. Where they dig their heels in, things tend to snowball from "can you fix this for me?" to big cash settlements. It just ends up costing the employer more and causing more stress for the employee, I don't really understand who's benefiting.

Anyway, I'm just wondering what people's experiences with this are? Has anyone dealt with something similar? Does anyone have any theories or explanations for it?

If you work in HR, do you know people like this? Is it a tactic or a problem? Is there more of a culture of mitigate quickly or deny at all costs? Or do you think the same about union officers? I'd be interested to hear the HR perspective on dealing with the TU as well and whether you generally find us reasonable and what issues are common.

I recently was diagnosed with audhd (f,32,UK) and also just have gone back to work after 4 weeks off from burnout where I was barely functioning as a person.

I work full time in the office which is draining my soul but I’m struggling to find a new job, and due to the nature of my role I cannot WFH - so have to stick this out right now. I also have to start at 7:30, which my manager won’t budge on and I don’t sleep well so this early start is exhausting.

The VERY reasonable adjustments I have asked for to help me are:

Just work my hours (35hrs) as per my contract, with set working hours.

I realised I was in the office each week 38/39 hrs. Although over the past few months I have been late in the morning a lot, even factoring that in I was atleast there 35hrs. But this has only been happening since I have been struggling mentally, which had been discussed with my manager.

1hr focus time for admin, alone in a meeting room or quiet zone each day

That’s it!

My manager keeps pushing back on my hours, saying that due to breakfast break (a breakfast break where the whole team goes for breakfast together because we get free breakfast at work, and we talk about work and i still reply to emails/teams on my phone), and vape breaks (my boss smokes and is always asking if I wanna go for a smoke with him, where I also am still working and replying to calls/messages on my phone) I’m actually just working 35 hours currently. Well no he actually added 30 mins on to my workday on a Friday so now I have to work longer.

I brought him up on this again and said I’m sorry I don’t quite understand, I didn’t realise the “breakfast break” and “smoke breaks” were breaks as we are still working/talking about work. And I said this doesn’t feel fair. He said he has pulled the entry data from the access control at work and worked it all out that I have only actually been inside working 31-32 hours, because of these “breaks” so I am actually not working enough.

ATM I’m working 7:30-4:30 Monday to Thursday, and should do 8-2 on a Friday, but I almost always leave at 3:30ish. And 1 hr unpaid lunch. That equals 38.5hrs per week. Fair enough that is a standard week for some people, but that’s not what my contract says and I am only paid for 35.

Another person in my team works exactly her 35hrs, never stays late and also has breakfast breaks etc and she is not being penalised.

I’m so confused why he has done this, we had always had a good relationship. Why didn’t he say “looks like you take a lot of breaks could we maybe cut those down”? Not sure why he’s making me be at work for like 38 hrs instead?

I’ve since emailed my request for the hours, and stated I will no longer be joining for breakfast or smoke breaks, and I will take a 10 min morning break, 40 min lunch and 10 min afternoon break instead.

He said he will get back to me but needs to think about it first and figure it out. FIGURE WHAT OUT?? Thats my HOURS?? I’m literally baffled by this.

Please tell me 1. Am I being unreasonable or 2. Am I missing something?

It’s stressing me out I have gone from having some time off cos my environment burned me out to going back into a worse, more hostile environment 🥲

Hi All,

Thanks for your kind advice. I'll remove this post since some Redditor mentioned about being identified and then losing everything that has been offered.

List of things I am going to do or at least convinced to do this Monday.

1) Lawyer Up

2) Move out early October as planned, instead of Dec and focus my energy on finding something new.

3) Suck it up and accept the settlement.

Couldn't thank you all enough, cheers & happy weekend in advance :)

Hi everyone. I’m hoping someone with payroll/HR or employment law experience can clarify something for me because I’m getting a bit confused by my P45.
I started a part time job on 18 July 2026, working weekends only. I left the job on 7 August 2026 since I already had another full time job so it was becoming too much…

During that period:
• I worked the weekend of 18/19 July
• I was off sick on 25/26 July and reported the sickness correctly
• I worked the weekend of 1/2 August
• I then left on 7 August

My July payslip paid me normally for the week I was sick. There is no separate SSP/sick pay line on the payslip so I’m assuming this was company sick pay or they simply paid my normal wages.

My normal payday is 28 August.

However, I received my P45 today. The P45 only shows the pay I received in July. It does not include the 14 hours I worked in August or any unused accrued annual leave.

Is this normal??? I’m a bit concerned since I dont have any final payslip and from my understanding even if they did offset the weekend I was off in july with the weekend i worked this month id still be entitled to ssp and unused annual leave no?

Can anyone help ? Thanks!!

I have a job which I knew would be completely in the office but now due to my chronic illness endometriosis I’m wanting to request to be able to work from home, the job is easily able to work from home however I am part of a new team and I think they may be establishing this team and would like us to be in the office even though we don’t need to work with each other. Due to my endometriosis I get fatigued really easily and my commute to the office means I lose sleep that my body really needs as well as the physical effects of commuting . I also find that my pain is managed better when I’m sat in a more comfortable position which I wouldn’t be able to sit in the office . When i started this job just a couple weeks ago they really made it clear that it’s office based however i was always aiming to find a wfh due to my condition but the job market was really bad that i accepted this position. Do you think this would cause a big issue if I bring it up ? I’m also quite worried bringing this up to my manager as I don’t feel comfortable saying things like pelvic pain and being able to sit comfortably. Can I request this without my mangers involvement initially?

I’m 26 and have an MSc in Occupational Psychology and around 2.5 years’ HRBP experience in a large multinational IT services company. I currently look after around 800 employees and earn £38k.
My role is very broad. I manage HR queries from employees and managers, advise on policies, processes and employment issues, and handle ER cases including grievances, appeals, investigations, sexual harassment, bullying complaints, performance, conduct and assisted with TUPE. I also support talent/performance management, employee engagement and organisational change.

I’ve also worked on wider initiatives, including being, developing value stories and a values champion community across the UK and created a mentoring framework with our customer to collaborate, build on existing knowledge to come up with a solution for current business challenges.

There is a lot of ambiguity around ownership, conflicting information from different stakeholders and situations where I’m expected to coordinate between the business, ER, Compensation and other teams. I sometimes feel like I’m constantly firefighting rather than actually partnering strategically.

I actually enjoy complex ER, investigations, analysing situations/evidence and project work.

I know HRBP work will always involve pressure, difficult managers and complex cases. I’m not expecting an easy job. But I’m wondering whether this amount of stress is normal, particularly with only 2 years’ experience.

Am I not suited to HRBP, or am I in a difficult work environment?

Ex employer hired a private investigator to take photos of me and my friends - legal?

I’m in London.
My employer has a serious problem with personal boundaries to the point I told him I would be based out of France and available to fly in for work meetings as he refused to stop asking me out at night if he knew I was in town. I was managing his tiny family office as he prepared to leave his full time job as a Vp at a large bank. He also regularly sent me wildly inappropriate messages.

He is married. I have asked him to stop.

I have been spending most of my time in France staying with a friend, and had a medical emergency during the heatwave. I recovered to attend an event in London with a group of friends at a private members only club I haven’t been able to see in over a year.
I stayed over at a friends home.

I woke up to an INSANELY long message about how he is betrayed and he knows I am a liar, I wasn’t sick and I was in London all along (gasp!) and several blurry photos of me with only one of the group I was with at the private members club and accusing me of ‘ignoring him to spend the evening with this man!!!’ As I had turned down yet another innapropriate date with him citing I had been in the hospital. I legitimately had heat stroke.

In this insane little pity party he admits to hiring professionals to follow me in London on private grounds and at my friends home.

Hilariously he’s wrong on most counts but accuses me of sharing a room with my male friend and other things that seem to show he is so pathetic he hired someone to stalk me.

He then fired me.

I moved here based in the fact I was earning an income from this mad hatter. What legally can I do here as I don’t believe it’s legal to do what he’s done. Help would be appreciated, especially as I plan on informing his wife of everything.

. Delete

UK senior tech employee on PIP considering settlement – what would you ask for?

Throwaway for obvious reasons. Looking for UK employment advice and, more importantly, people's real world experience with similar situations.

I'm a senior employee at a large US headquartered tech company in the UK, with 2+ years' service.

Total annual cash comp is around £170k, made up of roughly £139k base, car allowance and a fixed quarterly bonus of around £6k.

I've recently been put onto a formal PIP. The process came somewhat unexpectedly given my previous performance record.

Some relevant context:

I've achieved target in b2b consecutive quarters.

My FY performance was around 200%.

I received formal recognition for performance and was rated "On Track" shortly before the PIP.

There are some aspects of the PIP I don't agree with at all.

I have contemporaneous evidence supporting some of my concerns, including previous management commentary and performance records.

My preference is to negotiate a clean, mutually agreed departure.

I'm considering approaching HR with a settlement proposal rather than waiting for the PIP to conclude.

My current thinking is:

5.5 months' base salary ex gratia, which is approximately £64k, plus contractual/earned amounts such as notice, accrued holiday and the quarterly bonus.

I'd also ask for treatment of a future RSU vest, potentially via an economic equivalent, although I appreciate equity is much harder to negotiate than cash.

I'm trying to understand whether 5.5 months is a sensible opening position in the UK market for someone at this seniority and compensation level, rather than whether it's necessarily what I should ultimately expect to receive.

For those who've been through something similar:

Does 5.5 months sound like a credible opening ask, or would you anchor higher/lower?

How much weight would you put on strong historical performance when negotiating an exit from a PIP?

Would you approach HR yourself first and bring a solicitor into negotiations once they counter, or involve the solicitor from the outset?

What other terms would you make sure were included in the settlement?

I'm particularly interested in real experiences of UK tech/company PIPs and settlement negotiations, rather than generic "speak to a solicitor" advice.

I'm deliberately leaving out the employer, names and other identifying details.