My wife started a new job that has turned out to be unexpectedly fast-paced and high stress. Two months in, she has fallen desperately behind and it is clear that she will not be asked to stay beyond the 90-day probation period.
She’s miserable and her boss is exasperated and looking forward to starting over with a new candidate. My wife can’t quit though, because then she would be ineligible for unemployment, which got me wondering: could/should she ask to be terminated early?
Where is she employed? Different jurisdictions have different rules.
I’d be worried it could be used against her if they want to challenge her unemployment compensation. Something to look into, at least.
If it isn’t working out, perhaps a coffee off site? “Ya know, it’s painfully obvious that this position is not the right fit. In order to be eligible for unemployment, I would need to be let go. Or I can hang in here until my probation isn’t renewed…”
Seems like a win-win.
(Although my sympathies for your wife, who probably was excited by a new job only to realize it wasn’t the job she thought it was.)
Employers have to pay a portion of the benefit. If they have too many former employees on unemployment, their rates can go up. Moreover, it’s not free money. The State has to pay for it. It’s intended for people who are laid off for reasons beyond their control, not for people who aren’t competent at their job.
Job is in US/California…
Was she working before she took this job?
I believe you can quit for cause and still get unemployment.
But it has been a long time since I was worried about unemployment.
Scenario A
If your wife waits until she gets fired, there’s a good chance she’ll be able to collect UI. I say “good chance” because it’s not a guarantee. If the company can demonstrate that her poor work performance constituted material breach of duty, she may be denied benefits.
Scenario B
If she quits on her own, she will be denied benefits unless she can show “just cause”. Examples of typical “just cause” are: harassment, unsafe conditions, discrimination, etc. Inability to perform duties does not usually fall under “just cause”.
Scenario C
Asking the company to terminate you will work similarly to Scenario A. However, when EDD investigates as to why she was fired and if the company says it was at her request, they may see the situation akin to Scenario B. This scenario is risky for the company as well because it opens them up to all sorts of trouble and I cannot imagine a “proper” company agreeing to this request.
Scenario D (My suggestion)
Ask the company if they could request for her voluntary resignation. If they agree, your wife can leave the company early and still have a good chance to get benefits since she didn’t quit on her own. (The company asked her to.) Plus, she doesn’t get “fired” in her records, which I think is a good reason all on its own. Also, it’s better for the company to have someone resign on good terms rather than terminating them. Firing someone opens them up to all sorts issues down the line, both bureaucratically and legally. If she does go this route, make sure she talks to someone she trusts in HR and to have it off-the-record. You don’t want the company to have this request documented and somehow used as evidence that she was planning Scenario B all along.
One more thing. You mentioned your wife has only worked for two months. Make sure you check she’s eligible for UI in terms of earnings during base period. It’s kind of tricky so read carefully. Good luck.
In New Jersey, being incompetent at your job is considered beyond the employee’s control, since it isn’t their fault the employer hired them to do a job they couldn’t do.
I didn’t realize one could qualify for unemployment when they worked less than three months. Is there no minimum amount of time? How long does the unemployment compensation last? Can a person just get a job for a week and then collect unemployment for a couple years?
In New Jersey it would be limited to the amount of time of worked, up to 26 weeks.
[Moderating]
Employment advice is beyond the scope of GQ. Moving to IMHO.
Even during the initial 90 day probation period? This isn’t a situation of a long term employee couldn’t keep up with changing times. This is a person who couldn’t do a new job after a few weeks.
What’s the point of “probation” if you’re still on the hook for unemployment?
Yes, because New Jersey is an at-will state, the concept of a probationary period doesn’t have force behind it absent a union contract. However, as I stated in a different reply, she would only be able to collect for 13 weeks here instead of the full 26.
Some companies will adopt optional policies that formalize and slow down performance-based separation. We’re all at-will, but we still have a process that draws things out. And it’s common to have a different process for new employees.
In at least some states, the minimum doesn’t apply to the current job - for example, if I work at Target for a year , leave to work at a small hardware store and lose my job after a week , I will be eligible for unemployment because although I only worked at the hardware store for a week, the time at Target also counts.
Yeah, I know all manner of people game the system to maximize their unemployment, but this sort of approach impresses me as quite scummy.
How about she looks for and gets another job and then quits?
I’m not sure I’d use the term “game the system” in this manner but,…yeah.
For the OP: When an employer terminates an employee in such a way that the now unemployed person can now collect EI, that act brings both cost and scrutiny down upon the employer. What’s the upside for them? How is this not an attempt to ask her current employer to defraud the safety net system?
If she didn’t misrepresent herself in her job interview, and is putting full good faith effort into trying to do the job as it actually is[sup]*[/sup] then I feel like the company owes her some help here. They clearly did a sucky hiring job
*I know we don’t know for certain that both are the case here, but I feel like this is a reasonable assumption