I think my boss got me to sort of quit today?Follow

I don't know how it works in The US of Screweveryone over, but up here, we're required to get it in writing that the employee is giving notice.

Definitely not like that. Most states are "at will" employment, which means an employer can terminate you for any reason at any time.

They can't however, discriminate. So, they can fire you for just not liking you, but you have to ask yourself, "why don't they like me?". If it's because your female, non-white, gay, x-military, or handicapped then they can't fire you. Also you can't be fired for asserting your rights as an employee like if you whistle-blowed or filed a workers comp claim.

If you have a contract with your employer, that makes firing at will harder, and even a verbal agreement to employment is a contract as such.

But I think we're talking about two different things here. Being in an at will state means that in either case, you still get unemployment benefits. All it means is that your employer can't deny you those benefits if you quit, and you can't sue your employer if you are fired. I believe the only exception is if you are "fired with cause". To do that the employer has to document that you have violated some requirements for employment (late X number of times, violations of codes of ethics, stealing, cheating, etc). And trust me, it has to be documented very well.


It's a lot harder than some people seem to think to be terminated and *not* be eligible for unemployment benefits.

Write up for what? If you have a policy that says employee may not be late more than X times, you can't just one day say "You've been late X times, so you're fired!". You have to document (on actual paper) each time that employee was late, and show that you communicated this to that employee (often requiring that they sign something stating that they were informed that they were officially written up for it). Failing to have this level of documentation will get the employer laughed out of the unemployment hearing.

At least, that's how it is here in California. I suppose other states may differ.

EDIT: Let me be clear. I'm talking about what is required for the employer to not have to pay his share of the unemployment costs. Obviously, he can just say "you're fired" for any reason at all and fire the employee (in an at will state at least). That's not the issue.

Edited, Sep 5th 2012 1:58pm by gbaji

Sounds like you work somewhere pretty specialized, and that two weeks isn't really enough to train someone new to take over once you're gone. A month is pushing it on her end, in my opinion. Tell her the best you can do is give two months notice because there is simply no way you can tell what is going to happen half a year in the future, and that whole speel about how you'd be more than happy to stay indefinitely.

Best. Minion. EVER.

"You know those blood diamonds we keep hearing about? Yeah, gimme. I want some sweet, sweet African suffering right here on my finger, *****."

Unemployment benefits and termination claims are 2 different beings, but are complementary. California's standard is that to one of the factors it that someone has to be "Be unemployed through no fault of his/her own" to receive unemployment benefits. If you quit, and the employer reports on the Employment Development Department's inquiry form that you voluntarily quit, there's typically a telephone interview to resolve that issue. It's fairly easy to get around that inquiry. It's not the employer that gives out those benefits, it's the state and after going through the benefits process for a few of my former employees, I am seeing that the state is becoming more and more vigilant about loosey-goosey claims. Hawaii is the same way and I think Hawaii and California have a waiting period for those to get on benefits if they voluntarily quit their job.

If the employer terminates your employment with cause (you would never be rehired in their eyes), it's the same situation, there's a telephone interview to resolve that issue. If the employer terminate your employment and they would rehire you, your claim typically gets approved. Most employers (my office included) usually does not fight an unemployment benefits claim because the time and expense in doing that is not cost-effective.

For employment litigation, it's still drawn-out and typically when a termination claim comes about, the employee and personnel file does come to light and there better be documentation for an employer to prove that. However, some verdicts have favored the employee if the employee can be shown that the employee's behavior was reacting to a hostile working environment (consistently late because of sexual harassment from another worker as an example). But most employers still want to avoid the litigation so it's more cost effective to ask the employee to sign a resignation letter with the understanding that the employer will not fight the employee's claim for benefits.

Actually, I recently found out that there are certain scenarios where Hawaii, at least, will pay if you quit. One of those, which I found odd, is if there is a change in your maritial status.

I wasn't aware of the marital status part, but that list is pretty much what I was talking about earlier. I assumed we weren't talking about a case where someone just quit because they felt like being unemployed for a while. The most common scenarios are likely either health reasons or someone lines up another job, it falls through, and they can't get their old job back.

It may have something to do with if you got a divorce and... Well, I'm not sure and what. Maybe if you get married and your husband lives somewhere else and you have to move there? Or you get divorced and are forced to move because you can't afford your mortgage? Or your spouse dies and... well, anyway. Still a little odd.

I'll try to help.

In flyover country:

I quit=no unemployment payments.
You are fired for no fault (downsize/whatever) yes unemployment insurance.
You are fired for fault (theft/************************ = no unemployment payments.

Yes, documentation (rule of 3) is important, but not absolutely neccesary.


You understand, g, that California is NOT like the rest of the country right?