I’m going to be resigning from my company very soon. My company is an “at-will” employment company meaning I can leave at any time with no notice (for any reason) and they can fire me at any time with no notice (for any reason). The employee handbook, which is stressed as not a contract, states that while it is not necessary, it is preferred that the employee give 2 weeks notice when resigning.
My dilemma is this: I have heard stories about people resigning from this company giving 2 weeks notice and then being told to leave that day. I assume this means that they were fired and not paid out those 2 weeks. If that is the case, would I be eligible to receive unemployment payments if I were to be fired immediately upon giving 2 weeks notice? If I am, when can I start collecting this? I plan on having a job right away but just in case I don’t I’d like to know when I can start collecting unemployment
If they are going to fire me on the spot for giving notice I’ll have to base my decision to do so on whether or not they will pay out those 2 weeks. If not, I think that I will just give notice on my last day. The one thing I’m worried about with this approach is the effect it may have on any references to future employees. In all other ways I’ve been an exemplary employee (not just my opinion, this is backed up by plenty of reviews, etc.).
Has anybody had experience resigning from an at will employer? What did you do? What happened? What would you do in my situation (whether or not you have ever worked for an at will employer)?
SOP in my experience is that the resigning employee is often asked to leave the day they resign, but if they gave two weeks notice they generally get paid for those two weeks. YMMV
The only time I resigned from an employer that typically ran people off the day they quit, they made me work out the two weeks that I thought I’d have off.
Well, I believe Colorado is an at-will state. When I resigned my last job, I gave two weeks notice and they actually begged me to stay on longer if possible. It never crossed my mind that they might ask me to leave that day, so I can’t really help there.
I don’t know for sure what I would do in your situation. Even if I’d heard that they ask people to leave that same day, I would still want to do what’s right and give two weeks.
If they ask you to leave that day, I don’t think they have to pay you for those two weeks. And technically, you’re not being fired because you’ve already quit (so I don’t think you can collect unemployment).
I think it would look best to future employers that you give two weeks regardless. You might end up with an unexpected two week vacation but I’d rather that than have a record of giving no notice.
It is considered good practice to give at least two weeks’ notice. One of my co-workers gave notice a couple of months ago that she’ll be leaving in September. Where I have worked, the person who gives notice is expected to stay for the two weeks to allow a new person to be trained to cover his position until someone else can be hired.
If an employee is laid off, they are usually escorted out that day and are given “in lieu of notice” pay. This seems reasonable, in that a disgruntled employee can cause a lot of damage in two weeks.
I was given notice on October 31st though, and they still haven’t laid me off. There are rumours that there are another two years of work to do. If I stay with the company until I’m laid off (at some undetermined date) I’ll collect a week’s pay for every year I’ve been with the company, insurance paid for a month, any unused vacation and personal days of course, and a “retention bonus” (extra pay for not quitting). If I quit, they’ll only pay me my vacation/personal time. As much as I want to get the hell out of California, I don’t want to lose my severence package. This lay-off scheme is new, and may only be for the business division I’m in. The usual practice is for a person to arrive in the morning and be called into the supervisor’s office, and then be processed out immediately. But those of us who were notified in October have “termination contracts”.
As far as unemployment insurance goes, they have certain rules. They differentiate between “in lieu of notice” pay and “severence” pay. If you get one, then you are not eligible for unemployment benefits until the pay you got has equalled the amount of time you would have been employed. If you get the other one, then you may collect unemployment benefits after two weeks (I think). I don’t remember which type of termination pay results in the delay and which doesn’t.
At any rate, at the places I’ve worked if the employee quits he is usually retained until his desired termination date. If the employee is laid off he is usually given pay in lieu of notice; If he is fired he is gone immediately.
I normally would give two weeks notice as I do think that’s the right thing to do. The problem is, I also think it is the right thing to let me work those two weeks or pay me for those two weeks as I am counting on that last paycheck to pay bills. I would hate to do the right thing (give notice) and see my employer do the wrong thing (ask me to leave that day without paying me for the two weeks) and shoot myself in the proverbial foot. Plus, if it’s considered quitting and not being fired (because I gave the notice) then I would also be screwed out of unemployment.
It would be very unusual for the company to ask you to leave immediately unless there’s a very poisonous employee/employer climate at your place of business or you are known to have a bad attitude. Unless the work you are doing is completely superfluous, the company is going to want you around to do that job while they find a replacement and hopefully have you around for whatever debriefing is necessary.
If the company were in the habit of flinging people out the door the moment they gave their notice, then obviously no one ever * would * give notice, and this would leave the company in a potentially nasty situation the next time that a particularly key employee decided to leave.
You do say your company has asked people to leave immediately – you might quietly ask around and find out if that was due to a corporate policy or a specific bad situation.
Actually, in the IT world, this is pretty commonplace. Two of the places I worked at before and gave two weeks notice, they escorted me out that day, and I got paid two weeks admin, then got my last check. Most of the people I have worked with, the same. I think that it’s based on, if you’ve got someone who’s leaving who knows your infrastructure, you don’t want them screwing around with it on their way out the door.
I agree with BF, in some industries it is extremely common to be shown the door when giving notice of resignation.
It happened to my husband (who is in the IT industry) and it happened to me (I was in the travel industry). The thinking is that if you have a new job lined up with a competitor, you may be tempted to either do damage, or copy private company info for the new company.
Our situations were different from the OP’s in that we weren’t ‘at will’. IOW, we were legally obliged to give two weeks notice, so if the company chooses to show you the door, they can, but they have to give you the two weeks pay that you were prepared to work.
To follow up on what Finagle and BF said, it depends a lot on the nature of the work. In my line of work, confidential ideas are developed and if we know you’re leaving, we don’y want you to have access to what we are doing because we know you are going to a competitor. And as has been mentioned, there are situations where fear of sabotage by a disgruntled soon-to-be ex-employee result in an immediate suspension of work duties.
OTOH, there are other jobs where they will definitely want to keep you as long as possible to ease their transition to your replacement.
Without knowing much about your work environment, it’s hard to guess what might transpire.
I will say, though, that upon reflection on my own, my friends’ and my acquaintance’ experience, I can’t think of an incident wherein someone gave two weeks notice and was shown the door without getting paid for those two weeks.
Quite right, MannyL, but unemployment checks only come for so long…
tevya, you want to leave the company on as good terms as you can. It doesn’t matter what the relationship is, you don’t want them to be more annoyed than they are. In particular, if you want a reference, you need the good graces of at least one manager, or someone in human relations.
For my employer, it’s dependenton the manager, the employee, and the area they work in.
I had a coworker leave in…March, I believe. He gave notice one day, and the decision was made the next day to not have him work his notice, because the department was ending a project and it was a better time to have him leave. He was not paid for the notice he gave, though he did receive his vacation pay for his unused vacation.
I am leaving 2 weeks from today. My boss has know I am leaving since the week after above coworker left. I knew that I could be asked at any time to go, but it hasn’t happened. There are reasons for both aspects. With mine, the time left during my long notice period included several major items the department handles during the year. If they had let me go, I would not have been paid for the notice I gave, no matter how long it was.
But give the full two weeks notice. It looks better and allows for a better reference. Your supervisor/HR will make the decisioin whether or not to have you work through your notice.
That’s what I was wondering re: unemployment. I know that if I work my full two weeks or if they pay me for my full two weeks then I am uneligble for unemployment and that is fine. It’s just that I am counting on those last two weeks of pay.
Further background:
I work in IT.
My specific manager (who gets to make the decisions about who leaves when for the people directly under him) has been know to ask people to leave the day they give their notice. He has been known to do this with good employees out of some kind of weird little revenge. I.E. – If you’re going to quit on me you can just leave now.
My company is almost definitely losing the account I am working on in September. I plan on resigning in late August.
My company is trying to avoid financial trouble by cutting costs as much as possible. I.E. – They are requiring people to take at least 5 vacation days between now and September 30th. They are not approving use of Personal time, only of Vacation time.
A previous employee who worked on my team who resigned last year did get to work out her two weeks. She was not considered a good employee.
I am considered a good employee.
All of the above (except 5 and 6) cause me to worry that I might be asked to leave without pay. If I were asked to leave without two weeks pay, would that be considered quitting or being fired / laid off? If it is the latter, am I eligible for unemployment?
Just as it is common courtesy and common practice for an employee to give two weeks notice, it is common courtesy and common practice for the employer to pay that person for those two weeks even if they decide to escort the person out the door on they day they resign.
But it’s not required. A company is only required to pay a person for the hours they work (including accrued vacation).
If a company is in financial trouble, they may decide the money they save is worth the negative reputation they may acquire. Fortunately, this practice of not paying is rare.
tevya think of your two-weeks notice as an offer on your part to continue working as much as two weeks before leaving. The company may take all, some or none of your offer. The company does not have to pay you for work you didn’t do as a result of not taking your offer. Not taking your offer is not the same as firing you.
Ditto when a company gives you two weeks notice. You can just walk out the door that day and not get paid for the two weeks.
I don’t know - he gave a signed resignation letter (from my understanding). In that case, I doubt that an unemployment office would see it as a layoff rather than a resignation.