My boss wants to keep me, but has to fire me

I have a feeling I’m asking for it here, but here goes. Here’s the letter I’m sending to my boss. I’m gonna sleep on it and will consider all feedback before I send it. (Note: there is no attempt to write for style or grammar or syntax here; it’s intentionally dumbed down. My boss best understands things said the way he’d say them.)

[Boss]–

I just wanted to take an opportunity to try to clarify what all is at issue here, regarding my being laid off in favor of [Celia]'s seniority. Besides the personal issues that are, understandably, outside of the discussion–the consequences to me of losing my job right now–there are a number of practical issues I just want to bring out onto the table. I have no doubt that you have given this situation a great deal of thought and consideration, but precisely because so much is at stake for me, I want to kind of lay them out, as clearly as possible, and kind of “check them off” as considerations.

First off, you said something about, since you’ve always used seniority as a guide whenever you’ve had to lay people off in the past, it was necessary to consistently do so this time. I’m not totally sure what you meant by that; if you were concerned that [Celia] might have some basis on which to contest such a lay off. Well I did a little research. I found that, first of all, Washington is an “at will” state, as I’m sure you know, and you as an employer can dismiss someone for your own reasons, as long as the reasons are not illegal or discriminatory. And even if discrimination were an issue (which obviously it’s not), discrimination laws don’t kick in until a company is large enough to have 8 employees. I also found this (http://www.lni.wa.gov/WorkplaceRights/ComplainDiscrim/Termination/default.asp):

Q: Does a business have to take seniority into account when planning layoffs?
A: Not unless there has been an agreement about seniority through a collective bargaining agreement.

So although of course I understand you want to do the right thing, it’s my understanding that if your decision is to lay off [Celia] instead of me, you would be well within the employment laws and standards of Washington.

Now, of course, all this sounds pretty ruthless: “Here’s why you should FIRE [CELIA]!” – I don’t mean it to sound like that at all. This brings me to the pro/con part of my thoughts on this subject.

–I think you certainly know that I’m committed to [Neighborhood] Video for the long haul; I have a great deal of emotional and creative investment in seeing [Neighborhood] through this Netflix tsunami.
–[Celia], as you said, is possibly looking about for something else; I don’t know her very well, but I don’t sense that kind of commitment from her.

–And of course as someone who “needs” the job more, my willingness to do what’s necessary (e.g., float between [the two stores]) is something to consider as well.

–I’m probably the first person to overvalue my contributions in graphics, signage, marketing ideas, special feature research and design, even keeping up with Screen Gem reviews and upcoming obscurities, trying to remain aware of the kinds of titles that make us “not Blockbuster.” Basically, the things that I bring to the job that I think of as “value added,” the knowledge and creativity that I bring beyond just register-and-returns. Again, I’m sure I flatter myself to a large degree, but the personality of the [Neighborhood] store will change dramatically when I stop making those contributions.

–The store is at a crucial point right now. Obviously we need to bring in new customers. But we also need to respect the needs of, and retain, our old customers. I think that getting rid of what many customers view as a resource–my movie knowledge–and an asset–my familiarity with their individual tastes, and what they’ve already seen and haven’t seen, etc.–that this would be a bad time to remove that customer asset from the store. In other words, as is, as things stand, I have a great deal more specific value to offer to the [Neighborhood] store, right now, at this crucial time, than [Celia] does. I don’t doubt that she can come to know the store and its customers just as well, if not better, over time, but again I think this is a crucial time. This can of course be nothing but coincidence, and seasonal fluctuations, but maybe not, that the store did more poorly for those few weeks when both [my coworker] and I were gone, and there were no familiar faces behind the counter. And then numbers recovered when [my coworker] and I were back in place. Again, I understand that there are more factors involved in a complex equation, but still, our “teamwork,” and long-term rapport with our customers, has to have some value. Again, at a crucial time.

–The bottom line is, I guess, that I think it would be to [Neighborhood] Video’s best interest–in other words, to your best interest–to keep me on at the [Neighborhood] location. To MY best interest goes without saying, of course.

–Added to which, it is, as far as I can determine, entirely your decision, not [Celia]'s, to keep on whoever you choose retain. I guess I look at it this way: if the position that’s being laid off is “retail at [the other Neighborhood],” that position is unfortunately being eliminated. But if the position that I hold were to be described in its entirety–“retail at [Neighborhood], with the added duties of graphic and marketing work, and floating between stores,” obviously that’s a position that I, specifically, am far more qualified for than [Celia] is–she’s even refused part of that position–and you would be justified, economically and legally, in making that choice. (And I keep reminding myself, “[Celia]'s talking about finding another job anyway!”)

Thanks for your time in reading this. I’m sorry if it seems at all inappropriate, but of course I had to be sure that I tried everything to, first and most obvious, keep my job, but secondly, I feel a great deal of emotional and creative investment in [Neighborhood] Video and I want to remain involved in seeing it through this rough patch.

–[lissener]

My gut feeling is that if his mind was made up, this won’t change anything. And if his mind wasn’t made up, this letter won’t change his decision.

It’s way too wordy to get your main point across. Make it 1/4 the length, remove all the extraneous stuff (don’t say personal issues are outside of the discussion and then bring it up, that’s a really lousy way to look professional) and just say you’re the better person for the job and show why. Don’t talk about her negatives, stress your positives. All the other stuff is better in a face-to-face conversation.

Usually that is more of an issue of the employee being found eligible for unemployment than of the employer getting sued, unless the constructive discharge was illegally discriminatory (that is, you used constructive discharge to get rid of people based on a protected class) or in some way a violation of a labor contract or to avoid a pension obligation. As I write this, I think I’m basically agreeing with you–a discharge that would be legally risky if you terminated them outright is just as risky if you use constructive discharge. But AFAIK constructive discharge in itself is not something you get sued for. I’d be interested to learn if there is a way to get sued for that alone.

**lissener **- #1 is that this kind of stuff never goes well if you put it in writing. Especially since your boss sounds like a TLDR kind of guy. Find a way to have a conversation. If you haven’t already and have time to read a quick book on negotiation, like Getting to Yes, that might help.

Also - did you see that in the city of Seattle there is a local ordinance that makes discrimination illegal with any number of employees? I’m not sure if that applies, but before you jump on the 8 employees figure, I wanted to point that out. And I might be confused, but make sure you have it straight.

As devil’s advocate, is it possible that your boss knows something about his legal risk w/r/t his female employee that you are not aware of? That is, if he or another employee has been discriminating against or harassing her in some way, you might not know about it and he would know about the legal risk.

I think your best bet might be to try to sell him on the idea of cutting you both down to part-time, as **Dangerosa **mentioned. Maybe on the merits of keeping a variety of skills and personalities in the store. He may be able to save on benefits that way (of course, bummer for you). But with both of you having half-days free to job search, one of you is bound to find something else.

Wishing you good luck.

Thanks. FYI, the job position would be reduced to part time anyway; there’s another person from the other store who’s been a store manager for like 10 years, who’s keeping his fulltime job. Mine will be reduced to parttime to accommodate that, already. And none of us gets ANY benefits at all.

Lissner, if you put the same energy and passion into finding a new gig that you’re using to keep the old one - I really believe you’ll find something new in no time.