First off, thanks to Harriet the Spry for correcting me on right-to-work vs at-will. You are right, I knew I was misusing the term, but I blame it on my brain’s inability to find the right words/terms sometimes :smack:
As for the issue of severance pay/unemployment – it does vary from state to state. While I did get unemployment from the employer who gave me severance pay, it was because it really was wrongful termination. I was told (and the paperwork given to me stated) that I was “laid off due to company down-sizing” but when the unemployment office checked into it, they were told that I had “threatened and physically abused” a cow-orker. This was a bold-faced lie and I was willing to go to court if need be to prove my innocence. The girl that had claimed this had happened refused to lie under oath, and so the company was penalised and I was given unemployment – but in TN, if you get a severance package, you are ineligible for unemployment as a general rule.
As for the OP – you are complaining that this thread has become a “pile on.” I am sorry that you see it that way. I thought it odd that you felt that you deserved more than a week’s pay after only working for a company for 9 months. I thought, “Wow, what field does this guy work in that he would expect any severance pay at all when being fired.” I understand expecting something if you have been laid off – but fired? Nope, I don’t get it. Especially when you admitted that you didn’t sign off on the package.
Then I remembered why this thread struck me as so odd – I remembered this thread where you mentioned:
I am not quite sure how it could be wrongful termination or how you could expect any kind of additional severance under these circumstances. I donno, hard to feel sorry for someone who knew what he was doing, admitted doing it, has to face the circumstances and actually got more than (I would have thought) he deserved.
If your lawyer really thinks that you were wrongfully discharged, then persue that course, but remember that you, yourself admitted to not doing your job – and yet you still fot paid for an extra week.
[QUOTE=Barrels]
This thread has become quite the pile-on and I have no idea why. Is it that strange to ask for more severance pay? Google leads me to think not. At this point what have I got to lose?
[/QUOTE]
You might have seen much less of a pile-on if you had simply asked how you could improve your severance package rather than suggesting that you should have gotten more money to replace the company-provided “cell phone, laptop, Internet, land line, and car.” I think it was the sense of entitlement that caused the response.
[QUOTE=Litoris]
As for the issue of severance pay/unemployment – it does vary from state to state. While I did get unemployment from the employer who gave me severance pay, it was because it really was wrongful termination. I was told (and the paperwork given to me stated) that I was “laid off due to company down-sizing” but when the unemployment office checked into it, they were told that I had “threatened and physically abused” a cow-orker. This was a bold-faced lie and I was willing to go to court if need be to prove my innocence. The girl that had claimed this had happened refused to lie under oath, and so the company was penalised and I was given unemployment – but in TN, if you get a severance package, you are ineligible for unemployment as a general rule.
[/QUOTE]
That’s not what the Tennessee website says. From the sample separation notice (warning: pdf): “Do not include Severance Pay on this form. Severance Pay is considered pay for prior services; therefore, employees can receive unemployment insurance benefits while receiving severance pay.”
When I collected UI in Pennsylvania, they delayed the beginning of UI until the severance pay had “run out”, as mentioned upthread, but denying all UI if any severance pay is given would be insane - all employers would then give 1 day’s severance pay just to avoid paying the UI payments on that employee.
[QUOTE=gigi]
Yes, severance here in the event of a layoff is weird in that you have to work the days that count toward your severance. You get two weeks’ pay for every year of service so say you’ve been here ten years; 20 weeks before they really want you gone they will terminate you and then you work the 20 weeks until the last day. You don’t walk away with any lump sum.
That is, unless your boss decides that you staying will create too much trouble; in that case you can be released and stay home and get paid your regular check over those 20 weeks.
[/QUOTE]
Are you serious? That’s bizarre to me. Letting people stay on for months when they know they’re being let off seems like an invitation to loafing at the very best; vandalism or theft at the worst. :dubious:
[QUOTE=Barrels]
I work for a very small company, under 20 employees. In my profession a severance package is expected when a person is let go, for whatever reason.
[/QUOTE]
Interesting. My Dad’s been in sales for 40 years. My sister’s been in sales for 20. They’ve both been let go in the course of their careers, and I’d say your severance is generous. (In fact, my sister had to sue to get her commissions for booked sales).
I don’t think what **gigi ** is talking about is what I’d typically call severance pay. I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a layoff with departure dates scheduled by seniority. Because once they notify the old-timers, everyone will know what’s coming. I think **gigi ** may be misunderstanding something about this.
There is something called a retention bonus or retention pay that results in people staying on for a while after they’ve been notified of a layoff. When a plant is going to close or the downsizing is major, a core of employees is needed to close things down. HR, for example, often needs to stick around until the bitter end to get the other employees out the door. Some facilities folks may also be needed until the end. The idea is to pick trustworthy people for this role and incent them well to stay and tie up the loose ends.
[QUOTE=Harriet the Spry]
I don’t think what **gigi ** is talking about is what I’d typically call severance pay. I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a layoff with departure dates scheduled by seniority. Because once they notify the old-timers, everyone will know what’s coming. I think **gigi ** may be misunderstanding something about this.
There is something called a retention bonus or retention pay that results in people staying on for a while after they’ve been notified of a layoff. When a plant is going to close or the downsizing is major, a core of employees is needed to close things down. HR, for example, often needs to stick around until the bitter end to get the other employees out the door. Some facilities folks may also be needed until the end. The idea is to pick trustworthy people for this role and incent them well to stay and tie up the loose ends.
[/QUOTE]
Otherwise known as “golden handcuffs.” Golden handcuffs can be a quite nice deal.
[QUOTE=Barrels]
I should have mentioned that my lawyer has reviewed the facts of my termination and does believe that there is enough evidence to pursue a wrongful termination suit against the company. I would rather not take it to court.
Most companies offer severance packages so that you will sign over your rights to sue the company. In offering me 1 week of severance my boss is insinuating that I’m enough of an idiot to sign away my legal rights for a pittance.
[/QUOTE]
Bolding mine.
So you want a larger severance package to induce you to forgo your right to file a lawsuit that you’re virtually certain to lose? Forgive my saying so, but that’s what sounds like the thought process of an idiot.
[QUOTE=Harriet the Spry]
I don’t think what **gigi ** is talking about is what I’d typically call severance pay. I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a layoff with departure dates scheduled by seniority. Because once they notify the old-timers, everyone will know what’s coming. I think **gigi ** may be misunderstanding something about this.
[/QUOTE]
This is more on an individual basis thing, but yes, technically these folks are not earning their salary, but “earning” their severance. We had a business unit that wasn’t doing well and it was clear that it was going to close by the end of the fiscal year. One of the employees got the lay off letter in advance by the number of weeks of the severance they would be entitled by the date of closure.
It seemed crazy to me too, and I said “You have to work for your severance pay?!?” and was told yes, that’s how it’s done. Except in cases like another one where the business unit was closing but the person was already disgruntled and couldn’t be trusted. There, she was let out of the requirement to work and got paid biweekly as usual based on her tenure.
Here is the employee manual passage [bolding mine]:
*Employees terminated as a result of a layoff may receive two weeks of *paid notice ** for each full year of continuous service to a maximum of 52 weeks. Affected employees will receive payment for any earned but unused vacation. The department head and the Office of Human Resources may set a shorter than normal notice period if they determine that continuing the employee’s services for the normal notice period would be contrary to the employer’s interests. In such cases, HR may approve payment to such employee of an amount not to exceed payment for the number of weeks remaining in the applicable termination notice period described above. Payment will be at an employee’s base wages.
If gigi’s HR people want to call that severance, well… But it sounds for all the world like a separation policy that doesn’t include severance. Nothing wrong with that, it’s just a less generous separation policy than one that did include severance pay. Because if someone is working, what they are getting is wages or salary–“paid notice,” as it is called in the employee manual.
[QUOTE=Harriet the Spry]
If gigi’s HR people want to call that severance, well… But it sounds for all the world like a separation policy that doesn’t include severance. Nothing wrong with that, it’s just a less generous separation policy than one that did include severance pay. Because if someone is working, what they are getting is wages or salary–“paid notice,” as it is called in the employee manual.
[/QUOTE]
Agreed. They can call it severance all they want, but it’s not.
[QUOTE=gigi]
This is more on an individual basis thing, but yes, technically these folks are not earning their salary, but “earning” their severance. We had a business unit that wasn’t doing well and it was clear that it was going to close by the end of the fiscal year. One of the employees got the lay off letter in advance by the number of weeks of the severance they would be entitled by the date of closure.
It seemed crazy to me too, and I said “You have to work for your severance pay?!?” and was told yes, that’s how it’s done. Except in cases like another one where the business unit was closing but the person was already disgruntled and couldn’t be trusted. There, she was let out of the requirement to work and got paid biweekly as usual based on her tenure.
Here is the employee manual passage [bolding mine]:
*Employees terminated as a result of a layoff may receive two weeks of *paid notice ** for each full year of continuous service to a maximum of 52 weeks. Affected employees will receive payment for any earned but unused vacation. The department head and the Office of Human Resources may set a shorter than normal notice period if they determine that continuing the employee’s services for the normal notice period would be contrary to the employer’s interests. In such cases, HR may approve payment to such employee of an amount not to exceed payment for the number of weeks remaining in the applicable termination notice period described above. Payment will be at an employee’s base wages.
[/QUOTE]
This is not severance. The relationship has not been severed at this point. You are still working for pay. Your company has made a bold, yet stupid attempt at making its severed employees believe they received a severance package, but in reality, they’re giving you nothing. Nothing at all. Unless, of course, they’re giving you that two weeks severance each pay day *in addition * to your regular pay. And I’m thinkin’ not.
Our last layoff had something like that. They gave everyone I think a month or two notice. Then severance kicked in (a normal sort of severance package). For that month or whatever, you were actually still employed. They gave people the option (and a few people took it) of coming in for that month and using the company’s resources (computers, telephones) - or you could stay home and functionally just stay on regular payroll. And they did take away your responsibilities.
But it was in addition to severance, you didn’t have to actually WORK, and I suspect it was designed to transition people to unemployed - letting people have a chance to keep getting up in the morning and coming in for a bit if they wanted to.