@Sen_Adedotun and
@EdetRichy have already said most of what needs to be said, so I’ll just add this bit.
Contracts aren’t just formalities, they’re reference points for a reason. If your contract doesn’t include an option for payment in lieu of notice, and you went ahead to sign it anyway, then that agreement is binding. Simple.
In many cases, that omission isn’t accidental. Companies usually think through things like succession planning, cost exposure, operational disruption, or what it would mean for the business if someone leaves abruptly. Any of those could be why the payment in lieu option wasn’t included in the first place.
That’s also why negotiations matters, before you sign. If payment in lieu was important, that was the time to push for it. Once the contract is signed, the terms are no longer flexible by default.
Now, how do you move forward without things gettingout of hand?
Strategic and diplomatic negotiation.
Yes, practically speaking, a company may not be able to physically stop you from leaving. But the law still applies. And things like reference checks or background verifications can quietly influence whether you get the next opportunity or not.
So while the door may be open to exit, how you exit, and whether you breach agreed terms, can follow you longer than you expet.
Thanks.
Let's look at this scenario
Let's say you get a job, sweet pay, and all that. But they want you to resume immediately.
Meanwhile at your current job you have signed in your contract that you will give them 4 weeks notice before you leave. And there is no payment in lieu of notice.
How best can one handle the situation without burning bridges?
@Sen_Adedotun kindly share your opinion and possibly help us pull some of your HR mutuals on this.