Reality against wording
Whether pay, hours, location, duties, flexibility and benefits describe what genuinely happens—not what the template assumed would happen.
Employment contract review
A contract can look complete and still not fit the job.
If you already have employment contracts but do not completely trust them, I will review the documents against the arrangement you actually operate—not just run a generic clause checklist.
The useful starting point
The document is only half the evidence.
Contract problems often sit in the gap between the wording and everyday practice. Hours drift, roles grow, benefits are promised elsewhere, old policies are incorporated by accident, and clauses copied from another employer never quite make sense. A useful review tests the whole arrangement and tells you what matters now, what can wait and what needs a different kind of advice.
This route may fit when
Start here if any of this sounds familiar.
- 01The contract came from a template, previous adviser or another business.
- 02Your organisation, benefits, working patterns or management arrangements have changed.
- 03Different employees have been issued different generations of documents.
- 04A clause has become important because someone is leaving, challenging a decision or asking for clarity.
- 05You want a proportionate sense-check before issuing the same document to more people.
What I examine
The decisions behind the document.
A useful contract service joins the wording to the operating reality. These are the questions that make the document usable.
Core particulars
Whether the written terms cover the required information and point clearly to any wider policies or procedures that sit elsewhere.
Risk and usability
Whether probation, notice, confidentiality, intellectual property, deductions and variation wording are clear, proportionate and capable of being used properly.
Document architecture
Whether the offer, contract, handbook and local practices contradict one another or accidentally turn flexible policies into contractual promises.
What you receive
Something you can actually implement.
Exact deliverables are confirmed in writing so the boundary is visible before you instruct me.
- A focused review of the agreed document set
- Material gaps, contradictions and unclear wording identified
- A plain-English action note, prioritised rather than theatrical
- A clear view on whether amendment, replacement or specialist legal advice is proportionate
- Scope boundaries agreed before any additional drafting begins
Important boundary
A review is not a magic retrospective repair.
If there is already a dispute, proposed dismissal, TUPE situation, collective issue or contested restriction, the immediate facts may matter more than improving the template. Tell me that at the outset. I will not sell a document review where the real need is case-specific support or regulated legal advice.
Practical questions
Straight answers before you enquire.
Do you need every employee's contract?+
Not usually. We agree a representative document set first. If different versions, roles or working arrangements are material, I will explain what additional sampling would add before the scope grows.
Will you rewrite the contract?+
The review identifies what should happen next. A contained amendment may be included where agreed; a wider replacement document is separately scoped so you know the cost and boundary before drafting begins.
Can I send employee names and case details?+
Please start with blank or anonymised documents wherever possible. Do not put medical, disciplinary, grievance or other sensitive employee information into the initial enquiry form.
Not sure which route fits?
Tell me the situation, not the legal label.
I'll point you to the sensible next step.
Describe the real situation without including names, health information or other sensitive employee details. I’ll tell you the proportionate next step before any paid work begins.