A little help with terminology
 

I`m struggling to find the right terminology for a given situation, what would it be called if someone (management) altered a contract of employment without consultation of employees or senior management/employers. I keep leaning towards fraud but feel this isn`t quite right, any ideas?

Re: A little help with terminology
 

If its not fraud, i fail to see how such a thing can be binding?:confused:

Re: A little help with terminology
 

I'm pretty sure a contract that has been modified without the knowledge of all parties who signed it is known as "some valueless paper with words on".

As long as you have your original, signed contract; and you employers have the aforemantioned paper with no signature, your contract is the binding agreement. Your employer can change your contract with your cooperation. If they want to do this, you are in a position to negotiate. For example, if they want you to change your work pattern, you can agree to this if they give you something like "more money" in return, and have a modification clause written (or a whole new contract).

There are caveats to what I just wrote - for example if they ask you to indefinitely change your work pattern because they need you to, and you agree, then it can become a verbal change. You'd have to have said something along the lines of "I'll do it for a month and then go back to my contracted pattern" in order to protect yourself. It's an implied contract or implied change of terms otherwise.

Note that if you do agree to a rewritten contract, you should compare it with the old one carefully. before signing, and make sure they haven't sneaked in any changes in other sections. You should also seek professional, or at least targeted, advice. A forum full of local footy supporters is not going to yield the most valuable advice.

I'd suggest you read here and post any further questions here.

Re: A little help with terminology
 

It can`t be binding, but there`s a term on the tip of my tongue and it`s been bugging me for hours, not quite fraud but...
Can`t go into too much detail but the contracts of several employees have been altered because of a complaint to the union that they are doing work they shouldn`t be doing (or at least be getting paid more to do it), their contracts have since been altered on the computer system to say they should be doing this work.
I`ll be up all night if I can`t find out what it`s called.:bangh8:

Re: A little help with terminology
 

Not sure of the word you are trying to think of but for an employer to alter a workers contract without their agreement or knowledge is ILLEGAL plain and simple.

Re: A little help with terminology
 

Unilateral?

Re: A little help with terminology
 

Re: A little help with terminology
 

If management acts upon the contract as amended, it could be termed "breach of contract." ... as in failing to live up to the terms of the original document.:confused:

A little help with terminology
 

Thanks everyone , Falsifying documents was the term I was looking for, here`s hoping the union rep is a good one cos they should have a field day with something like this. :)

Re: A little help with terminology
 

I'm unsure if a employer is under any legal obligation to make a employee aware of any amendments to their work contract (I'd assume they are).
But,since the foundation of any contract is that the parties involved agree to the terms,the amendment is 'nil and void' should your employer (straight away) act upon it.

If a employee is aware of a amendment but still goes to work and receives payment without voicing any concern,that could be deemed 'legally binding'.

I'd be slightly dubious of any employer who changes a employees work contract without any consultation.The fact that they did not get folk to sign this amended contract shows a degree of incompetence Imo.
Any bonafide employer should ensure,as good work practice,that this contract is understood and signed by any and all employees.
A contract gives protection to the involved parties and if not understood/signed by the parties involved,it leaves folk vulnerable in the eyes of the law.

I would talk to your employer or Rep and (in writing) voice any concerns you have with the amendments before using words like "falsifying documents" and "fraud".

Re: A little help with terminology
 

It`s all in the hands of the union rep now accyex, just wanted help with the name of the crime (because that is what it is) because it was bugging me and I wasn`t having any joy through googling.

Re: A little help with terminology
 

I'd have gone with "breach of contract", as mentioned by Eric, but as you now say the union are involved if the rep has anything about them they should be able to extract decent terms for those involved.

Re: A little help with terminology
 

This is why for every contract I ever get I sign every page, that way they cannot just reprint whatever they want with your signature on the last page.

Re: A little help with terminology
 

My dear old dad told me to do that with every contract of employment....and I have to say that when put into practice it caused some raised eyebrows. I think that it marked my card as something of a militant, but it is sensible to protect yourself in that way. Some employers are unscrupulous

Re: A little help with terminology
 

The person involved is now aware that they have been caught out, the union rep was "discusted that someone in her position would do such a thing."
I can only think she must have thought that no-one keeps their copy of their contract of employment, which was a big mistake.