contract question......

[Rip]

There are two workers, there is only need for one. Who goes? The fixed term contract ends - bye bye. No need for any kind of negotiations.

Besides, if you fire the one who did not have an end date in his contract, you must first offer him is job back before you're going to hire anybody else to do the same or similar job within the next nine months - and if I have understood right that "hire anybody" includes rehiring the guy with a temporary contract when his contract expires.

[cors187]

There are two workers, there is only need for one. Who goes? The fixed term contract ends - bye bye. No need for any kind of negotiations.

Besides, if you fire the one who did not have an end date in his contract, you must first offer him is job back before you're going to hire anybody else to do the same or similar job within the next nine months - and if I have understood right that "hire anybody" includes rehiring the guy with a temporary contract when his contract expires.

I dont really understand what you said,but if the worker1 had a fixed term contract which is not current ,then the law classes the worker1 as an indefinite contract worker if he is asked to come to work after the expired contract date.
For the employer to remove worker1 and hire worker2, the employer must offer worker1 his fixed term contract back with an affixed end date?
Solution-The employer offers a 14day fixed term contract to worker1 and then hires worker 2, would this scenario be agreeable to the knowledge you guys have about lawful contracting duties??

[Pursuivant]

Pours some soap into your ear and get rid of this idea of fixed term contracts - they do not exist except in imagination or if you work on a really crap deal.

Lets say Tom, Dick and Harry are working in a department. Tom has a contract with no end date, Dick has a years fixed contract ending 31.12 and Dick is employed through an agency, so the agency pays his salary and he is a "sent worker".

So, the business is going bad and the company is getting restructured. To get rid of Tom, the company needs to start YT (redundancy talks), and prove Tom is superficial, he can't be put into any other department etc. so Tom gets made redundant. If the business picks up and they want to hire someone to do the job, Tom needs to be offered his old job back within 9 months. Dick on the other hand has an end date. The employer can get rid of Dick with an YT as well, but on the other hand he only has to wait until Dick's contract ends and its goodbye Dick. Poor Harry gets a phone call in the morning - you ain't on the shift list.

So, the firing order is Harry, Dick and Tom.

[cors187]

I fail to see the logic in calling an expired contract worker this new term of contractual worker without end date.

There is a difference in the courts of intelligence between a perpetual(defined) contract and an indefinite(undefined) contract and by the proof of the worker having an expired fixed term contract clearly shows the court that this worker was never intended to be a perpetual worker,therefore it should be clearly noted that the worker now continuing in an indefinite(undefined) contract with out any affixed dates should either have another fixed date(defined) added or should receive a current contract or employment status record(defined) that proves his perpetual employment.
Thats a law, thats intelligent.

[Rip]

There is a difference in the courts of intelligence between a perpetual(defined) contract and an indefinite(undefined) contract

The word the law actually use is "toistaiseksi (voimassa oleva)", '(valid) until further notice'. Whether you think it is intelligent or not is irrelevant.

and by the proof of the worker having an expired fixed term contract clearly shows the court that this worker was never intended to be a perpetual worker

The law quite clearly says the contract is deemed to be "toistaiseksi voimassa oleva", with all the legal benefits related such contracts.

therefore it should be clearly noted that the worker now continuing in an indefinite(undefined) contract with out any affixed dates should either have another fixed date(defined) added or should receive a current contract or employment status record(defined) that proves his perpetual employment.
Thats a law, thats intelligent.

No, that is not the law, and trying invent three categories when the law has two is not too bright either.

[Pursuivant]

A "fixed" contract without renewal as a fixed contract but work continuing, or with consecutive renewals, becomes an "open end" contract. You apparently have had this "think", read the law instead and "know".

[cors187]

Sat Sep 01, 2012 7:10 am
The contract cannot become permanent,but i would seem to think that by "you still working after the end date""that your boss and yourself have agreed to extend the contract".
You being at work proves there is an agreement and you are entitled to every detail of the former contract, which is mutually extended.
I think the law will say that you are not working without terms and agreements,but you have the terms and agreements of the last contract and another end date should be affixed.

This is what is considered valid until further notice.

Its a valid contract but not a permanent one as the employee and employer has not given the agreement to be a permanent(perpetual).
Thank you

[cors187]

therefore it should be clearly noted that the worker now continuing in an indefinite(undefined) contract with out any affixed dates should either have another fixed date(defined) added or should receive a current contract or employment status record(defined) that proves his perpetual employment.
Thats a law, thats intelligent.

No, that is not the law, and trying invent three categories when the law has two is not too bright either.

its not a category, its the judges final remarks.

[cors187]

A "fixed" contract without renewal as a fixed contract but work continuing, or with consecutive renewals, becomes an "open end" contract. You apparently have had this "think", read the law instead and "know".

i cant understand your english.
but here is

Open-Ended Agreement Definition:
A contract silent as to an essential term left either to the discretion of one of the contracting parties, or in making the duration of the contract indefinite.

An agreement which leaves to one of the parties a certain amount of discretion to define the scope or precise measure of their obligations under it, or an agreement for an indefinite period of time.

[Pursuivant]

Here is: http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/kaannokset ... 010055.pdf

An employment contract is valid indefinitely unless it has, for a justified reason, been made for a specific fixed term. Contracts made for a fixed term on the employer's initiative without a justified reason, and consecutive fixed-term contracts concluded without a justified reason, shall be considered valid indefinitely

See now, there is two types, without end-date and with end date, and the one without the end date is the standard one.

[Rip]

therefore it should be clearly noted that the worker now continuing in an indefinite(undefined) contract with out any affixed dates should either have another fixed date(defined) added or should receive a current contract or employment status record(defined) that proves his perpetual employment.
Thats a law, thats intelligent.

No, that is not the law, and trying invent three categories when the law has two is not too bright either.

its not a category, its the judges final remarks.

In your own personal fantasy world. Me and Pursuivant are trying discuss what it actually is at the Finnish work places.

[cors187]

Im trying to show you real world,
You see, the without end contract you love to mention which is stupidly confusing, cannot last indefinitely, it cannot last, because it is vague and it is non agreed by employer and employee.
Its an interim status put on the contract, or much like the words rip dug up "valid until further notice".
The guy that posted this is like the other 20 guys i talked with in the last few months.Their Fixed term contracts ended and they dont know whats going on , they just kept turning up to work.
This Valid until further notice contract will only last until someone takes it to court and then the contract must change, it must change into an agreed form with both parties agreeable.Bang, the indefinite contract which was vague and undefined has ended and the new defined contract whether fixed term or perpetual has begun.

So calling it a no end date contract is useless.
I have no argument with the fact that a contract that was not settled in the correct manner should still be classed as valid.Or the fact that a contract that has been repeated enough times should also be classed as perpetual.

[Pursuivant]

Im trying to show you real world,

I showed you the Finnish law. Can you read? So then the question is, can you understand?

You see, the without end contract you love to mention which is stupidly confusing, cannot last indefinitely, it cannot last, because it is vague and it is non agreed by employer and employee.

Yes it can, as is been proven.

Its an interim status put on the contract, or much like the words rip dug up "valid until further notice".
The guy that posted this is like the other 20 guys i talked with in the last few months.Their Fixed term contracts ended and they dont know whats going on , they just kept turning up to work.

Yes, so do their terms of work change? Hours or pay? Exactly - the old terms continue.

This Valid until further notice contract will only last until someone takes it to court and then the contract must change, it must change into an agreed form with both parties agreeable.Bang, the indefinite contract which was vague and undefined has ended and the new defined contract whether fixed term or perpetual has begun.

Apparently you are too stupid to understand the law, even if its written in English.

I have no argument with the fact that a contract that was not settled in the correct manner should still be classed as valid.Or the fact that a contract that has been repeated enough times should also be classed as perpetual.

Yes, so what is your argument then? Except that you prove hiring stupid foreigners is a risk to the company.

[cors187]

Apparently you are too stupid to understand the law, even if its written in English.

"without end date" is a useless term! Get over it.

[Pursuivant]

Get a contract without an end date, instead of an useless one