I may be switching jobs soon. The problem is that I may not know how soon I would have to start my new job after getting hired.
At my new job, new hires must go through an 8 week training ‘class’. Once they hire enough people at a time initially (like a dozen or so), they start up a class. It is possible that the next ‘class’ will be starting in early october, which would mean I wouldn’t be able to give a proper 2-week notice to my employer.
However, I do want to leave on good terms at my old job, and yet don’t want to risk giving them a 2-week notice now because I’m not 100% certain I’ll get the job or exactly when I’ll start. So I had an idea of a loophole in the unlikely event I won’t have 2 weeks between getting hired and starting my new job:
As soon as I’m 100% sure I’m hired at the new job, I’ll give my two weeks notice to my old job that day. Whatever days I can’t work (because I’m starting my new job) I’ll have a coworker who isn’t working those days substitute in for me. My current employer told me I’m responsible for the two weeks after notifying them of my resignation, but they didn’t specify I actually had to be there. Since we have to find people to sub for us if we can’t work on a certain day (even if we are violently ill we still have to make sure someone subs for us, it blows) anyway, I figure I can still technically give my two weeks notice even if I can’t actually be there for the two weeks.
As a former manager, it would work for me. The two week notice is a courtesy so I don’t have to scramble and find replacements for your shifts. If you want to do the scrambling, no skin off my nose.
It is not as good as two week notice, but better than nothing. I think how it will be perceived will depend on your overall employment relationship.
It is honestly a bit crappy of the new employer to give you less than two week notice. I know from your prior threads that your new employer is a large bureaucracy, and this kind of jerking people around is typical of working for large bureaucracies. But it really is ridiculous not to be able to decide who you are hiring two weeks in advance of your training. As an HR practice, it will bias them toward hiring the currently unemployed, which isn’t usually desirable.
Because of the US practice of employment at will, however, the only thing you have at stake by giving less than 2 weeks notice is your former employer’s impression of the situation. You aren’t dealing with any legal issues.
The worst your employer could do is make an example of you by terminating you immediately. You would not get paid for the time you didn’t work. You would have a few days free before starting your new job. They could have the satisfaction of saying you were terminated involuntarily instead of resigned. You might, however, be able to apply for unemployment benefits for that time. (And, if the new job didn’t work out, they might be on the hook for additional unemployment benefits). Of course, then it’s all on them to cover your shifts, so it’s not painless. An employer would only do this if a) they were a little psycho or b) for business reasons it were really important to make sure they always got 2-week notice (think astronaut, not tutor).
I’m curious as to how you’re “responsible”. The two week notice is more of a couresy than anything else. Technically, you could go tell your boss to fuck himself and walk out the door.
Yeah, you’re only as responsible for those two weeks as you make yourself responsible for them - you can quit and walk out the door, giving up those last two week’s pay, and there’s nothing a company can do about it.The bottom line is always to do what is best for YOU - lord knows companies always do what’s best for them.
Why don’t you try the honest approach, and say hey, here’s my two-week-but-might-be-a-bit-longer notice? And let them know you’ll keep them informaed of any new information. It gives them more time to interview if it takes longer than two weeks, and it keeps you getting paid. That is, if they are professional about it.
I take it your current employer is not the type that has you escorted from the premises as soon as you turn in your resignation and then just pay you for the two weeks you gave notice for?
IIRC, Incubus works as a poorly paid tutor, and the employer expects short-timers to call around and find replacements.
I would not say anything until you know you have the job. And if it turns out you give less than a two week notice, apologize. Sometimes it’s just the timing of the thing.
FWIW I have had several employers that had to have me right away, and could not wait for me to give two weeks.
Every single one of them turned out to be scum.
As a result of these experiences I will not consider working for any company that will not allow me to give at least 2 weeks notice to an existing employer.
YMMV of course, but you might want to think about this.
Incubus, you should feel, IMHO no obligation to those who have treated you so shabbily.
Quietly arrange things so that you can tell them you’ve found a new job and depart immediately. They can’t ‘make’ you do anything. If they withold your final check, inform the CA Division of Labor Standards.
Yes, I’ve read that thread. What doesn’t compute is the poorly paid part, and being expected to find fillers in your absence. That’s a supervisors job.
I agree with those that said giving two weeks is more a courtesy than an actual rule. If you can get people to cover for you I think you’d be good.
Most bosses I’ve had would probably just tell you to take off. “Two weeks” everywhere I’ve worked just means “alright, give me a day or two to find someone to fill in.” I can’t see how a company having a lame duck employee would be a good situation for either.
FWIW I posted about a similar situation about 6 months ago where they wanted me to agree to wrongdoing because I didn’t give two weeks. I was an “on call” person. How the hell does an “on call” person give two weeks? So what would I do, just sit there and tell everyone I’m busy and can’t come in for the next two weeks?