Notice Period

Not sure exactly where to put this thread but anyway...

If an employee gives in a month notice after quitting, are you required by law to keep them for the whole period or can you let them go earlier?

Well, normally it is up to the employer. If the employee has handed in the 1 month notice and the employer don't want the employee to hang around, then the employer can choose to agree with the employee to pay him/her for the full month, as the contract undoubtedly states, but that the employee does not have to show up. Most amicable way to solve it 

If an employee breaks their contract is the employer still obligated to pay?

In such a case, pay them for time actually worked, but there's no requirement to pay anything else.

also the contract can be terminated by mutual agreement. In other words, if the employee wants to leave and the employer does not want to keep him/her around then they can mutually agree that the contract is concluded right away or at any point up to the 30 days. You don't have to pay anything except for the time owed.

If an employee cannot finish the contract, a contractually good reason has to be given. Standard contracts would list funerals, sudden illness or some such as reasons. Thus, usually, if the employee has been honest and forthcoming and given due notice, there is no reason why the employee should not pay. Howvever, if the contract is being broken for no good reason, even with a notice, unless it is stipulated in a legally binding contract, the employer is under no obligation to pay. Quite on the contrary, my contract, for example, says that if I break my contract for unacceptable reason, I have to pay my employer compensation. There should be a part of the contract this person has signed which will explain who has to pay something or if there is no need for payment.

Employee is not leaving for a good reason. The contract states that the employee must give 30 days notice but doesn't say that anything else. It doesn't say whether or not school must keep the person for that time. The employee will be paid for everything worked was not let go immediately. School took 1 1/2 week of the notice period but choose not to keep the employee for the entire time.

It's hard to read between the lines in a contract.

I'm no lawyer, but here's my 2 fen worth:
Seems to me that the employer would like 30 days notice if a teacher is leaving in order to have classes covered until they find a new teacher. If the employer wants the teacher to leave sooner, and the contract doesn't say the teacher will be paid for the 30 days, pay them for what they've worked and send them on their way whenever you like. If the teacher is breaking the contract for no good reason, the employer should be under no obligation other than paying for time worked.

If it is a Chinese contract and there is no definite statement about renumeration for the departing employee, then that chap is shit out of luck. If there is need to read between the lines in a contract, the Chinese contracts always favour the employer. If it merely states that the employee has to give 230 days notice, then that employee should not be expecting any money. That's the kind of thing that I would look for and demand re-writen before signing a contract...my two cents worth.

My understanding is that the employee is giving you time to find a replacement, and continuing to cover classes while you do that. He's not just vanishing into thin air. Do you want to cut him loose right on the spot or have him continue teaching? That's your choice. If you would just as soon be rid of him now, setttle accounts now, give him the release letter, and send him on his way. If you want him to finish the month, you will owe him for hours worked up until last day. What you don't owe is the airfare/completion bonus, but he knew tht when he gave notice.

I can only reply based on what I know, which is very much how things would work in the uk, where I studied law.

The employee has a 30 day notice period, he hands in his notice, the employer now has two options:

1) Keep the employee working and pay them for the full month.
2) Tell the employee he is no longer needed and request them not to return to work, however, you must still pay the employee for the full month. (Often known as 'gardening leave') This is often used where the employee is leaving for a competitor and the employer does not want the member of staff around the company giving them the opportunity to steal clients and damage the business.

In the UK just because an employee has handed in his notice does not mean you can terminate the contract, the notice period is there to protect both parties.

If an employee hands in their notice and refuses to work their notice period, this would be a breach of contract. So would terminating a contract just because they have given their notice.

As far as UK law in concerned, as long as the employee is willing to work the 30 days, you must pay them, even if you don't want them to actually work.

Obviously all of the above might be worthless in China but I can only advise on what I know, I hope this has been of some help.

Does it make a difference if the person in question is already breaking a contract?

Depending on how they have broken the contract it could well be considered null and void. Would need more details.

Giving notice to quit is not breaking a contract, as he is sticking to the terms of the contract, assuming he is willing to work out said notice period.