I believe you can still get unemployment if you were fired-under certain circumstances, depending on whether it was legit or not.
You may actually be able to get unemployment even if the firing was legit. I was once fired ( for being absolutely horrible at the job). My employer fought the case, but since I was basically fired for incompetence as opposed to absenteeism or refusing to follow policy, I was eligible for unemployment.
Nice. Your opinion is much appreciated at this time.
Taking days off that the company owed him is something that you should be fired for?
Are you retarded?
Yes you can collect unemployment even if you were fired. I believe this is true in all states, but I can’t guarantee it.
It doesn’t matter if you were fired (call it “laid off” if you want, it still means fired) because there was not enough work or if it was because you were a complete idiot, or took 4-martini lunches, or were rude to customers. You still are eligible for unemployment. There are a few circumstances in which you can be denied unemployment IF your employer contests it and IF you were fired for severe gross negligence. Just being a stupid screw-up is not considered gross negligence.
GopherGod, I didn’t mean that you were any of those bad things. They were just examples.
Teehee!
[sub]I worked for Stream for a year and a half! I got laid off three times, rehired at more than my previous salary each time, stupid bastards![/sub]
Sucks. That’s how it goes in most Big Corporate Call Centers, unfortunately. You put in your time, do good work, and this is how you get rewarded.
GopherGod72 wrote:
Good. Now, keep your wits about you in the future.
Dryga_Yes wrote:
No. But you’re likely gullible. Not only was he allegedly fired for them, but he wasn’t “written up” for each one as well. He made it sound perfectly normal.
GopherGod, are you sure they wouldn’t give you a positive reference? I’ve been fired (not just laid off) before, and the bosses politely told me they would do me the favor of not messing up my chances for future employment.
In addition, what’s to say that he wouldn’t have given you the same type of reference if he did let you quit that last day?
I have to say, I’ve never quit a job…and I certainly wouldn’t consider doing so without already having an alternative line up. So I really don’t know what you would have gotten out of quitting that you don’t get for being fired.
I can’t speak for the other states, but in Virginia, unemployment benefits are available only if you’re unemployed through no fault of your own. See Code of Virginia, § 60.2 et seq.
For those posters suggesting otherwise for their own states (missbunny) - got a cite?
- Rick
delphica, I can confirm that my company does the same thing as Dangerosa’s. All I’m allowed to do is confirm that they worked for me. I’m not allowed to say why they left, whether they were good or bad, not even which dates they were under my employ - I have to refer them to HR for the dates.
In Ohio, eligibility is based on “just cause”.
If you quit, you can still be eligible for unemployment, but you have to show that you had “just cause” for leaving – they asked you to perform work that endangered your health or you were physically unable to do; they refused to provide legally required safety equipment; they violated terms of the hiring agreement such as hours and wages.
If they fire you, the burden of proof is on them to show “just cause” such as violation of company rules, neglect of responsibilities, or poor performance.
Link, for those of you who are demanding proof.
In HR, my favorite little tools are two sneaky questions.
The first is “So, would you hire him again?” Sometimes I’ll get an answer, sometimes no. Depends on if I’m talking to another savvy HR person or a direct supervisor, usually. HR people never answer that.
The other is “Three (X) years there, eh? That’s more (or less) than average, isn’t it?” This answer says a lot. If it’s more than average, then either you were better at your job than average, they were happier with you than average, or you were more complacent than average. I’d follow that up in an interview.
I’m still curious about a company that writes someone up for taking days off that are due them. Care to elaborate on that policy, GopherGod?
I’m wondering if the “due” days were something akin to our sick leave. Here you accumulate sick leave entitlement, but you are not - technically - entitled to take those days off for any reason other than illness. As unused sick leave is “lost”, and these days many companies limit how much sick leave an employee can accumulate, many employees do try to use their paid sick leave (the world renowned Australian “sickie”). This practise can backfire horribly if the employer demands proof of illness, and especially if an employee needs to take leave for genuine illness having already used their sick leave for other purposes.
Flex-time is another form of “paid time off due” which can only be accumulated up to a given limit, and which cannot generally be “cashed out” (although some small businesses are quite happy to cash in accumulated sick leave and flex time). Flex-time, however, can only be taken at a time which is convenient to the employer and I can’t help wondering whether while the OP was technically entitled to PTO he was taking it without prior notice to the employer.
I’m astonished that references in the US are so restricted in content as to be meaningless. I certainly hope we don’t follow that trend here.
We all know how smart you are, and what a good writer you are (writin’ all them clever paordies and all–we’re so very impressed). Just cut us losers some slack, okay? There’s no way we could ever live up to your high standards, oh great one.
Such a high horse we ride.
Prick.
Count me among those dismayed by Lib.
I’m sure this is an unpopular opinion, but I share it. This rant, aside from the painful abuse of the English language, does not add up. I’d like to hear an explanation as to why this employee was ‘written up’ and given a ‘final warning.’ I didn’t gather from the OP that either was without cause.
You can collect unemployment for being fired if you can prove that you were not terminated for just cause. This is not as hard as it may sound.
This doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.
Question A: If you were quitting anyway, and you don’t get unemployment either way (which AFAIK, in most states you don’t, since in either case you’re arguably to blame for your loss of work), then why do you care that you were fired?
If it’s the reference issue, then
Question B: If you were taking days off to “use them up” and inconveniencing and/or pissing people off to the point that you got multiple write-ups and ultimately a “last warning,” why on earth do you think you’d get a good reference from this company anyway.
In all frankness, and without knowing anything more than what you said yourself, it sounds like you were pissing in your own nest, professionally speaking, and though you may have reaped the results in a manner you didn’t anticipate, I don’t see why you wouldn’t have reaped the exact same results anyway – which is not say, no good reference.
I don’t mean this in a “you deserved it!” sense – how would I know? – nor in a “sucks to be you” sense. I don’t mean to sound unsympathetic, but I’m not seeing the complaint here.