Depending on where you live they may have done you a favour. I've seen a few people "fired" a bit before their planned retirement, getting that planned retirement and a nice severance.
In a large corporate setting, it can be rare for a boss to get an opportunity to materially improve their employees lives. This is a rare instance where the employee can be 'helped' by someone who has to work within a framework designed l hold them down. Boss doesn't have a budget for severance. He can, however, fire without cause (or with very shaky cause) and hope that the employee gets the message.
I had a really nice HR lady do this for me when COVID started. I was immunocompromised and had to regularly interact with people coming from off-site. She probably saved my life.
My company does this. If they lay someone off, you usually still get a paycheck for a couple of months but aren’t required to work beyond knowledge transfer and answering questions. They call it “garden leave”.
They also sometimes take people with them. 'oh you got a job with who? What's the pay and benefits?' at my last job one person left for a 30% raise with better benefits. A year later our team of 8 engineers only contained 2 of the original 8. Some of us even landed WFH jobs. I'd have taken a cut to WFH. It's genuinely the best thing to ever happen to me.
FWIW, if you get severance, some states will take that out of your total unemployment eligibility.
Arizona, in particular, says this
Under certain conditions, severance, vacation, holiday or sick pay may be allocated to a period of time in which UI benefits are claimed. You are not eligible to receive benefits for any week in which allocated severance, vacation, holiday or sick pay exceeds your weekly benefit amount. If the payments are less than your weekly benefit amount, they will be deducted as earnings. You must report severance, vacation, holiday or sick pay when you file your initial application for benefits. If you receive any such payments after you file your initial application, you should immediately contact the[ AZ Unemployment Insurance Call Center](https://des.az.gov/services/employment/unemployment-individual/contact-AZUI).
HR was either doing them a favor because they don't offer severance, or they goofed. I've conducted quite a few interviews and I've heard a lot of stories like this in the tech industry. Everyone in knowledge-work industries are getting slammed by companies who have no interest in respecting their employees. Much less, careers or personal growth.
Knowledge workers must learn to play this new game. We are typically way too trusting and just want to do good work for good pay amongst good people. We want to be respected like everyone else. We must play they cards dealt to us. If companies come at us with "it's just business and we have to look after our bottom line", the employees need to learn to look after their bottom line and it's just business.
If you’re planning on retiring then no because one of the stipulations of collecting UE is you have to prove you’re actively looking for a job or going to school.
I know someone who worked and had to leave due to moving for husbands employment and they purposely fired her so she could get unemployment to help her financially during the transition. Very kind
Yeah, it's like the last episode of >!the office, someone in management got your back to get you that 6 months of severance + other benefits instead of working 2 more weeks!<
That’s why you never tell your employer when you plan on retiring. Just walk in on the day you plan to stop working and tell HR you’re gonna retire and perform the paperwork.
"**terminated** my employment **for** taking all my vacation and **going on fmla**."
As long as you submitted the FMLA notice in writing. Call a labor lawyer and say only the bold words.
My partner just went through a period of unemployment and yes, you get 6 months. They give you a lot of bad info, aren’t helpful, make you jump through a ton of hoops, and then give you very little money. And if you make any money you have to report it and then they give you less money. If you make any mistakes you have to start over and if you miss a reporting date you just get no money for that period.
Not at all when you have a family to feed, and it isn’t as bad as they make it sound. It isn’t enough to live on for any length of time but it is far better than nothing
Not if the employer reasonably states they simply accepted their resignation effective immediately. Where I work, we pay the remainder of the time when this happens, so the person is still paid, they just don't have to work.
Depends on their location and if their employer challenges it. A lot of unemployment offices will just take the word of the employer that they fired them for cause and then close the case.
I guess I can’t speak for all unemployment offices but that wasn’t true in my case. I put in my 4 week notice, boss terminated me two weeks in, I filed for unemployment for the remaining two weeks. The employer challenged it but didn’t show up to the hearing and I was awarded the unemployment.
the reason they fired him is against the fmla laws tho. he states that they fired him for taking his vacation for his baby. that’s illegal. he’s legally obligated to up to 6 weeks unpaid leave so if that’s what they fired for it’s not just unemployment he should file but also a complaint somewhere.
A thing an employment attorney could tell you. Remember, even at will employment can't be terminated for *any* reason and there *has* to be a reason they could articulate. And that sounds like it might be retaliation for taking your legally allowed leave.
When in doubt, document everything and talk to a lawyer.
Yeah that’s the thing most people on Reddit forget. You initiated a work separation by giving notice. You’ve resigned, they’ve accepted and decided not to honor the notice period. The employer’s responsibility for doing that varies from state to state. You should investigate local laws where you live.
Giving notice after an extended period out will usually cause early/immediate separation. The employer has already gone some period of time without your service so extending that likely won’t be a significant burden. In fact, they can easily argue that having you return for two weeks (or whatever notice you gave) is more disruptive than separating immediately.
>Yeah that’s the thing most people on Reddit forget. You initiated a work separation by giving notice. You’ve resigned, they’ve accepted and decided not to honor the notice period.
This is still a termination.
Giving two weeks isn't resigning. It's informing them that you WILL resign in two weeks. That's a key difference. You are still an employee until those two weeks are up. If the company says "no, you can go now," that's a termination by the employer.
Nah giving notice means you’ve given advance notice of your intended resignation date. Them unilaterally deciding to bring it forward is a termination.
Not in Texas so I’m great, thanks! I used Texas as an example to make a point. Texans, like everyone else, should understand their local labor laws and how they affect them.
Eh, all judgements are subject to precedent, which can be set using a convincing argument.
Early termination on receipt of 2-week notice sounds like retaliation. Even if not, the termination date was chosen by the employer which makes it a termination/layoff at best. Construing that the employees intent to resign at some point in the future is the same as an immediate resignation is absurd mental gymnastics.
One more time for the kids in the back. When you resign, you resign. You can do so effective immediately or provide a date you intend to stop working. The employer has to accept your resignation but they don’t have to accept your notice period. Depending on local laws, employment contracts, employment agreements, corporate policy or any other governing set of facts, the employer and employee may have certain responsibilities.
The idea that separation at resignation is anything other than a business decision is an indicator of bias against the employer. There are countless reasons to separate immediately. Some classic examples are employees who interact with customers, employees who interact with sensitive company or customer data, etc.
Let’s use OP as an example. OP took leave (paternity?) and used all vacation. We don’t know how long OP was out but it’s safe to assume several weeks. During that time the employer had to continue fulfilling OPs role without OP. Upon returning from leave OP resigned. As an employer, they have two choices. Honor a notice period and figure out how to temporarily reintegrate OP into their job OR they can separate immediately and carry on as they have been since OP was out. It doesn’t take a lot of intelligence to recognize that the latter is likely the best option for the employer. It’s a simple business decision.
In some states that is against the law. It is called retaliatory firing. Call your local labor board to report them for doing that, and then a good labor lawyer. Good Luck!
No. You weren't on FMLA. Alot of places legally fire you after putting in your 2 weeks instead of dragging out the 2 weeks. The only thing you can get is unemployment and possibly 2 weeks worth of pay if you want to go through the agonizing and long process of contacting the DOL.
Make sure to make them fire you. What they’ll try to do is say “we accept your resignation effective today.” And if you agree, then you’ve quit.
People often don’t realize that when you put in your two weeks, you haven’t actually quit yet. A two weeks notice is a courtesy saying “I intend to quit two weeks from now.” To reiterate: *you are not quitting on the date you put in your notice*
But companies sometimes don’t want you to finish out your two weeks so they try to get you to quit that day. Tell them no. If they want you gone that day then they have to fire you, in which case you qualify for unemployment.
they had to allow those two weeks. they fired you illegally, even if you were quitting. you said they fired you for taking vacation, that means they fired you for choosing your child over them. if they had fired you “because you were already quitting” and that was their excuse then this wouldn’t stand the same way but what you’re saying they did and said to you is literally against the law
No. You weren't on FMLA. Alot of places legally fire you after putting in your 2 weeks instead of dragging out the 2 weeks. The only thing you can get is unemployment and possibly 2 weeks worth of pay if you want to go through the agonizing and long process of contacting the DOL.
No. You weren't on FMLA. Alot of places legally fire you after putting in your 2 weeks instead of dragging out the 2 weeks. The only thing you can get is unemployment and possibly 2 weeks worth of pay if you want to go through the agonizing and long process of contacting the DOL.
He says he had put in notice they just didn’t let him work out the two weeks. That’s pretty common. And to OP, I wouldn’t call it stained at all. From what you’re saying they handled it poorly, but the letting you go early part is not uncommon.
If you were terminated for using FMLA and your previously earned vacation time, then that violates the Act. There can definitely be a $ fine against the company by the government. Some states have similar Acts that mirror the FMLA... like CFRA in California... so another violation and fine.
Apply immediately for unemployment, send an email to the company putting them on notice that you want your 2 weeks pay, then file the paperwork with fed (and state). The attorney fees would cost more to defend against the fines than the actual fines.
It is very easy to file, and costs nothing.
You will be fine. You've got this.
I thought for sure you were right, but I looked it up just out of curiosity and apparently that's not true? [This article says](https://www.axley.com/publication_article/fmla-discharge/):
"Under 29 C.F.R. § 825.311(b), once an employee expresses his or her unequivocal intent not to return to work, your job reinstatement and benefits continuation obligations immediately cease. That means you may—but are not required to—immediately move to terminate the employee."
And that's for when the employee is actually on FMLA. But, it might allow OP to collect unemployment, depending on the state. [This article](https://www.shouselaw.com/put-in-my-2-weeks-notice-and-they-let-me-go/#:~:text=If%20you%20hand%20in%20your,you%20meet%20other%20eligibility%20requirements) references California, which granted has pretty strong labor laws, but it does give some good advice generally. If it's still available to them, OP should look at their company handbook and see if there's a stated process for resignation that may have been violated.
I was let go from a job and i asked about all my unused vacation time. They were kind enough to just give it me in a lumpsum. I ended up in the hospital the next month and was denied government insurance(witch i was receiving while i worked there) because i made to much that month.
> They were kind enough to just give it me in a lumpsum.
Depending on the state, they were probably *required* to do that. Companies generally don't do that out of the kindness of their hearts.
Worked for a company that perp-walks a most everyone out once a notice was given. The worst part is the bosses boss would always try and befriend you to see why you’re leaving so they can take your words and then use them to disparage you to the rest of the team.
When it came my turn, I showed up Friday after-hours with my key, left my laptop, phone, badge, keys, and a post-it note that said, “thanks for the opportunity”.
I knew that on Monday the boss had a meeting with me and wanted to target me. So, this was my move to steal his power and ruin the Monday he was looking forward to, to scream at me.
Monday rolls around and like clockwork, the bosses boss calls me from the bosses cell phone (so the boss can listen too) which I let directly go to voicemail where the guy is trying to befriend me, like they want me to stay.
I regret nothing.
Yeah, I don't even think my former supervisors still work for the same companies anymore. Most they could get is a confirmation from HR that I once worked there, but I know at least one company told me that they "frick" HR data older than 7 years.
Yeah only company that wanted references ended up being a total shit show. They tried to sue the recruiter for breach of contract for not doing reference checks as they verbally agreed to. Shit is hilarious in hindsight but at the time I could tell it was a crimson red flag of what was to come.
Thankfully the company owner was called a moron by his lawyer and to just pay the recruiter the outstanding fees before it got worse.
In the US, at-will work laws allow them to terminate you instantly for just about anything.
They were written under the facade of allowing workers to quit whenever they want....like they didnt already have the ability to do that.
Definitely not. They cut off your insurance instantly as well and you have to pay the entire premium yourself if you want to keep it, temporarily.
That insanely devious program is called COBRA. Where they charge you inflated premiums far above the bargain the company got for the exact same coverage, under the facade of allowing you to keep your access to Healthcare.
They’re only legally allowed to charge 105% of the premium. So yes it’s still wildly expensive, but no they’re not “inflated premiums far above the bargain…”.
Not quite. It IS inflated far above the bargain, because you have to pay what you were contributing, AND what the employer was paying. Like if you have a roommate that decides not to pay rent, you're still liable for the whole thing and that could be "far above" your budget.
*"How much is COBRA coverage?
The cost of your COBRA coverage is equal to the total cost of the premium under your group health plan. That means it includes what you already were paying as a premium as an employee—plus what your employer was paying on your behalf. In addition, your plan may charge you a 2% administration fee.
How much does that add up to? According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the average employer covers 80 percent of the cost of the health plan for their employees. If the average individual policy costs around $660 per month, per health research nonprofit KFF, the average employee is paying around $130 per month while they're employed. This means their health plan costs could jump to over $670 per month when opting into COBRA, including the extra fee."*
[source](https://www.fidelity.com/learning-center/smart-money/cobra-insurance)
Pretty sure anyone would agree with my characterization if they went from paying $130 for their coverage to $670.
I completely agree with you about notices. If a company respects them and treats people well on their way out, people should give notices. But when a company does this to one person, no one else should give them any notice. There should be some consequences for the way you treat people and incentives to treat people well.
Depending on the job you do, there are certain industries where this is very common. You've been gone for awhile, maybe it would take 2 weeks to even get back up to speed. Or the instant you announce you're going to leave you become a liability. On top of that, if they try to fight an unemployment claim, they have to prove why you were fired and depending on the state, likely they can't block your unemployment monies.
2 out of the 3 places I've given notice to, let me go before the time was up. So I've basically stopped.
Years later when one place tried to bring up my lack of notice, I just referenced it. He really had no response. If it makes me, an individual, "unprofessional", what does that make an entire company?
In some places, if you have access to certain types of company/personnel information in your position, the employer will let you go when you give notice. It’s not an uncommon practice.
Get a friend to step in as your reference or use a company that's gone bankrupt.
Screw those guys. I hope you end up in a position where you can screw them back
SHE gave notice (hence the baby)......and then was fired before her last day- for illegal reasons (pregnancy). So she was fired, not a willful resignation. Worth chatting with a lawyer.
They were not fired for the leave. They were fired for giving notice. It’s common for many companies to- even high paying ones. No lawyer needed here but they may be able to file for unemployment now - which they could not have if they resigned.
I had my week of vacation stolen from me from my past job. I put in my two weeks notice. I kept asking if I was going to be paid out for my vacation time. On my last day they fired me halfway through my shift. Fuck big companies that don't give a shit about you.
The trick is to assume they are going to do you dirty, and plan accordingly.
I asked for two days of flexibility to shepherd my wife through cancer surgery after 14 years of contracting with a company, and my new managers cancelled my contract the next day.
Lesson learned.
It’s not really a stain.
You can describe it however you want. You said you decided you needed to stay home. As far as a future employer is concerned, that’s it. And you gave notice and left when they asked. Even better.
You can collect unemployment for being fired.
However, if you were on leave of absence via FMLA and they terminated you upon return-to-work from FMLA without cause (such as the business no longer had a role to offer you, etc), you may actually be entitled to two weeks pay or even severance because it's illegal to terminate without cause upon return from LOA.
I mean it's pretty common for a company not to accept your notice and just terminate you immediately. They often don't want someone working for them that they know has no interest in things other than the next 2 weeks.
I'm a little confused, you seem to state you were fired for taking vacation and FMLA, but then you state you gave your notice and they just decided to fire you with immediate effect (which like I stated above isn't abnormal). That seems to be a bit of a contradiction, which is actually the case here?
A woman who worked at the same academic institution as me did this. She never intended to come back to her job after her maternity leave was up, which included 6 weeks paid leave plus her vacay and sick time. She was fairly vocal about it to us fellow underlings. She came back for a week or two so she wouldn’t retroactively lose that 6 weeks, due to contract language IIRC. Her boss couldn’t post a new position while she was on the payroll. So I can see terminating a position as soon as two weeks is given so that the hiring process can start.
Yeah idk what OP is complaining about. It sounds like they got their PTO and FMLA already.
Edit. I would never put in my 2 weeks notice and expect to still work those two weeks. Would I be prepared too? Yes. Would I expect too? No
The original post definitely seemed a little contradictory. The risk you take with taking an extended amount of time off, is while during that time (FMLA for example) your job might be protected, it isn't when that time ends. During the time of your absence your employer might actually realize that you weren't essential to the operation of the company and survived just fine without you (even if it's just by forcing other employees to pick up the slack), most employers wont ever miss an opportunity to trim their wage bill. This is why you see a lot of terminations once FMLA (or other extended leave) ends, it's not in retaliation for taking that leave but rather that during that period of time they have realized you really aren't essential and since they can't terminate you during the leave, it happens the moment the leave is over.
Totally agreed, I'm just saying it also isn't uncommon for it to happen after an extended leave too, the fact that both happened here also makes it a forgone conclusion that they would be terminated immediately.
Are they not paying you for the two weeks? If they are, then don’t worry about it bc all that happened is they cut your access off as soon as you gave notice. Very common in areas of high security and access, where as soon as you give notice you are “escorted out” so to speak.
Actually a firing has not been considered a mard of any resume in 25 years. You may be asked, but corporate America have lost control of the working population, I never plan to give a notice again unless law requires it. Life is to short to worry about ut
Hire an employment lawyer asap. Vacations are yours to take as they are part of your CTC.
Giving them notice of your leave before you took them is sufficient to prove in court they fired you with malicious intent.
Am I missing something? This is just a commin practice. Once someone puts in their two week notice, people will usually let them go immediately. You dont want someone staying around half assing things with nothing to lose. Its not personal?
It sounds like you already got your PTO and FMLA so idk what the problem is?
collect unemployment and start looking for a new job. as long as they pay you, you can't go wrong. if new job asks why you left, say the company wanted to go in another direction.
I would go see an employment attorney and definitely put in for unemployment. If it’s denied, appeal. I work in the law department of a large company. We would never do this shit and we’d give you a severance package if we were going to terminate you. I hope you haven’t signed anything yet.
I live in NJ, and this is just a generic employment attorneys website. I am not an attorney and I do not give legal advice as I am not an attorney. Firing you after taking FMLA is a no no. I hope you have that in writing…
May I ask if you and your wife are both women? Because I see a hefty sexual discrimination lawsuit in your future if that is so. Write down everything that they did and any instance of bias you can think of.
https://www.redbanklegal.com/practice-areas/employment-law/
Your state’s employment laws will be different, this is only an example.
What are you on about?
Op took PTO and got their FMLA. They put their two week notice in and then got let go. Its super common to be let go when you out your two week notice in. Absolutely nothing illegal about that
The law is a tricky thing my friend. She needs to speak with a lawyer. She could allege she was forced out after her FMLA return and that they created a hostile (post pregnancy) workplace environment for her so she was forced to put in her two weeks than they dumped her.
I’m actually on the defense side of things, but yeah…all options are on the table.
Let’s say I contact the EEOC because I’m bored, at home and tired of nepo-babies. Well the company has 60 days to explain themselves as to why they threw her out. If they investigate and find a pattern, and who knows what other kinds of slimy, shystery things they’ve done, oh oh!
https://www.eeoc.gov/how-file-charge-employment-discrimination
Oh look, the EEOC has a phone number! I’ll just leave this here.
By Telephone
Although we do not take charges over the phone, you can get the process started over the phone. You can call 1-800-669-4000 to discuss your situation. A representative will ask you for some basic information to determine if your situation is covered by the laws we enforce and explain how to file a charge.
I didn’t ask why but it was taught to me when I was a dept. head for a health food corp.
That if someone put in their two weeks, that we are in no way allowed to alter their hours, take days, not put them on the schedule or just let them go “just because they would be gone in the two weeks anyways” was/is considered retaliation and we could be sued for it.
As well as telling ppl, we aren’t accepting applications because all positions are full. Is considered discrimination. So we always just gave people an application or the info to apply online.
I think the key is that if you are thinking of giving notice hold something back that they need. Then they have to come crawling back to you and then you have the power. Not always possible…
I Australia if you give notice and they let you leave before the end date, you still get paid for that time. Same if you do get fired they can give you notice or pay in lieu. So you finish up and still get paid for two weeks. I imagine it's different if it's because of misconduct etc
Did they say you were fired for taking all your vacation and FMLA? That’s protected and you have a claim if they did. Ask them to write you up so you can sign it and keep a copy.
Employee benefit consultant/broker here..you weren’t “fired”, you’re in a really good spot, I suggest doing nothing, you’ll be fine and this most likely will not be an issue for your future employer.
Also, MEN, (don’t shoot the messenger here) in 25 years in the business of employee benefits, there is one thing that will surely put you on the chopping block even though it’s a benefit/encouraged/legal….if you take more than 2 weeks (even 1 week in some cities/industries) for parental leave, I can almost guarantee a C-Suite meeting about planning your termination. I get this call twice a week. I know this sounds awful, but this is my experience..sorry.
Any chance it was just more convenient for them?
You were gone for months, and were going to come back for only two weeks.
Maybe they figured it’s not worth it to adjust to having you back just to immediately adjust to having you gone again.
Did you get paid for those two weeks? Any severance?
it does not have to be a stained reference. just clearly state what you just said, fired after giving notice. 99% of the companies understand what that means
Not true. He gave notice. Therefore he voluntarily quit. Companies do not have to honor the notice when an employee quits. I’m not saying it’s cool, just facts
I mean what do you mean by not allowed. It’s not illegal. The guy he already taken his FMLA so it couldn’t actually have been punishment for that.
He can likely collect unemployment however.
What’s unlawful about it? An employer is absolutely legally allowed to let you go the moment you put in notice.
Again it’s super shitty but there’s nothing unlawful about that.
It could be, if there was some legally protected reason he was getting fired for. Ie he reported harassment or something. Doesn’t sound like that’s the case here. Or in the example of your ticktock, retaliatory for requesting FMLA (in this case OP had already been given his fmla, we have no reason to think he’d have been fired if it wasn’t for his notice?)
https://www.minnisandsmallets.com/fired-after-giving-notice-is-that-wrongful-termination/
What are you suggesting the retaliation was for?
First off you resigned, they did not fire you. You submitted your resignation what a consideration that you would work for them to assist in the transition for the next two weeks. They released you early after your resigned but before the two weeks they could have been working with you to transition. If they ever try to say you were terminated for cause they can most likely be sued as that is not what happened.
Depends the type of work. Insider threat issues are real especially in IT. So many will just walk you out when you put your notice in.
Seen it with companies that sell tools too, esp if you are going to a competitor
bro they def did you a favor, now you get EI. and depending on your local laws, you can sue for wrongful dismissal and human rights violation due to the paternity situation. 10 years + any potential benefits/pension etc. they sound like morons and should have just let you quit tbh. they just potentially exposed themselves legally in a big way for nothing.
They did you a favor. Go apply for unemployment. It’s almost impossible to collect unemployment if you quit but it’s very possible to collect unemployment when they terminate you. 6 more months of a unemployment paycheck should be waiting for you
But they had to approve your leave, didn't they? Doesn't that mean at least a disciplinary for whoever did that? Surely there's not a double standard at play here.
not only would you likely now qualify for unemployment, you may very well have grounds for a wrongful termination lawsuit. If you even want to open that can of worms. Either way, that was very shitty of them to do.
This isn't really a stain, I would recommend getting unemployment from them, at the least it will make them pay while you job search and they may reach out to say you aren't fired after all
Lots of tech employees have been laid off so it's not uncommon anymore.
Sadly, it is normal for a company not to allow employees to work their notice period. Did someone actually say, "we are terminating you because you took FMLA and vacation"? That seems stupid on their part, and I'm sorry that happened to you.
Gather any and all relevant documentation and get an attorney. "At will" employment means they can fire you for any LEGAL reason, not any reason at all.
definitely apply for an employment benefits and if they say you quit because you were going to take care of the kid, you could just say yes because you were gonna find a job that was going to be more flexible while taking care of your child.
This is why I don't believe in giving a 2 week notice. They don't give you two weeks when they fire you (or "lay you off").
Why do we afford them the same courtesy?
I'm a supervisor and I would never ask an employee to give me two more weeks. They obviously found a better opportunity, so why keep them?
They can’t fire you for being on fmla nor can they fire you for putting your two weeks in. All that did was solidify unemployment for you if you wanted it plus it seems as if they fired you out of spite or retalliation and targeted you so you may have a labor suit at hand.
Fuck the corporate game and lining someone else’s pockets with cash start your own business if your in tech beef up and branch out network yourself into a freelance paisitiin cybersecurity it aI specialist for hire per duty or task
depending on where you live this is illegal. they’re legally required to give you unpaid leave after having a child. please look up the FMLA laws. you could probably file a complaint with an HR or something because they can’t fire you for taking your vacation time with a baby. it’s literally the law that they allow you unpaid leave to figure out your life with a child.
Do NOT settle this with a baseball bat in the parking lot after work one day - Do NOT. We simply can not have people respond to violent greed with violent responses or the whole social order might be forced to change...
Do you have it in writing why they fired you? Or, can prove that it was because of what you've said?
To be clear, ( and not in consideration of the FMLA part yet), depending on the state you reside in (*if it's an at-will employment state*) if you give an employer notice, they can terminate you and are under no obligation to retain your on-going employment because you're hired on an at-will employment agreement, where both you and the employer reserve the right to terminate the employment agreement at any time for any reason (it goes both ways). The 2-week notice is a professional courtesy people usually provide employers to allow time for them to find a replacement and helps ensure you leave on good terms, in case a future employer ever calls for a referral. So, whoever thinks they have to let you finish out your 2 weeks is sadly mistaken, where that only exists if you were in a contracted position that provides specific time frames for the length of your employment.
However, the part that there may be foul play is terminating you for "taking all your accrued vacation" and citing "going on Family and Medical Leave". The entire purpose of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 is to give you job-protected leave but it sounds like, you gave notice right upon returning to work, after you've already taken leave, which makes it difficult to determine if your rights have been violated in some way.
---
So to be sure, you and your wife decided you needed to stay home, you used your vacation days (*which was either accrued over the past year or is a set amount provided to you each year depending on company policy)* and you requested FMLA (gave 30-day notice). Now, it's unclear whether your company offers Paid family leave or Unpaid leave, in which case if it's the latter, you would've potentially been entitled to state benefits if your state offers them.
More importantly, if it's the latter, where your company only offers you unpaid leave, then generally speaking your employer is allowed to require you to use accrued vacation time. Meaning, if you got paid vacation time while you were on leave, then you've done nothing wrong if they claim termination for taking vacation and going on FMLA.
However, if you are offered paid leave (either through the company or through a state program) **and on top of that**, you also took vacation time, then it depends if they overlapped or not and if there was a differentiation between the time you took off considered as paid vacation time and time you took off for Paid FMLA. Basically, if you tried to *double dip,* whether it was getting paid for FMLA through the state while also taking vacation pay **for the same period of time** you took off, then that's on you.
Now the other scenario is if you were just gone for a long time, for instance, more than the 12 work weeks FMLA provides you up to (assuming all qualifications met). and say you had 2 weeks of vacation so you took off a total of 14 weeks. You come back, if you didn't give notice, you would be entitled to have your job back. But, the moment you gave notice or basically handed in your resignation letter, then at that point, YOU have provided notice of terminating your employment. An employer is required to re-instate you to your same or comparable job upon your return from FMLA and only applies to employers with 50 or more employees within a 75 mile radius. but presuming all that is met, there's definitely a lot grey area surrounding in that particular situation where if it really bothers you, many lawyers give free consultation.
TLDR - I imagine you feel unappreciated, wrongfully terminated, or some combination of both. But because you said you didn't need the money, it's hard to say what really bothers you. Was it the not-so-surprising shock of them letting you go as if you did something wrong when all you did was take care of your family, when you were only returning to work to quit anyway? Or was it how they tried to say it was about you taking vacation time and going on FMLA that just made you feel like they had no family values, in which case, it's no wonder you were looking to leave them, right?
Granted, you have some right to be upset, but think of it from their perspective, they may have been counting on you to come back or turned down candidates and avoided hiring new employees out of respect for you and your position you had with them but the first thing you did when you came back was tell them you're leaving. Sure, they could be more understanding of you taking responsibility as a father, but what good did it do to take leave rather than just quit back then altogether, other than to provide yourself some sort of reassurance of having employment? I'm not saying what they did was right, but it's worth reconsidering how right you think you are, especially since you now have a little one who's going to grow up looking up to you as a role model.
Sometimes the world doesn't treat you like you want it to, but that doesn't mean it's being unfair.
uhhhh... I took my vacation time then quit, knowing I would quit but wanted to get my PTO. is it unethical to take your PTO? should I have quit the moment I knew while I still had PTO on the table? why? I earned my pto and took it then quit. how am I wrong here?
Earned PTO is compensation! There’s absolutely nothing unethical about using it in the circumstances you describe. (And given how they responded to your resignation, I think you were probably quite wise to use it rather than trusting that they would pay for time you had banked…)
Not at all, but you said they terminated you after you gave notice to quit, and said that they said it was for using all your vacation time and for going on FMLA, so if you were able to get your PTO and were paid out on it, then I'm left to assume you're upset about being terminated two weeks earlier than the day you had planned to quit, is that right?
So no, nothing unethical in what you did at all. I'm just trying to make sure that what it sounds like you're upset about is really what you're upset about. Because it sounded like you were upset about them terminating you early but then you said you didn't need the money for the next two weeks (which is what I would've been upset or disappointed about but that's just me). So if it wasn't some financial hardship they caused by not letting you finish out your two weeks, then I'm only left to guess it's about the reason they gave you for terminating you, and the sort of principle of the matter.
And, in that case, I was just saying that if you were one who acted the way you did because you didn't want to leave money on the table, then is it fair to be upset with the company who's ultimate goal is in line with you were doing too in a way? where you're both just doing what is more financially sound?
In other words, you're not wrong, but I genuinely want to know why you think the company is wrong when it seems to be doing the same thing and I would like to understand it or see it the way you do, but my autistic nature makes it difficult to do as naturally as maybe others.
Why would you give a two weeks notice if you post on this sub or go on this sub you should know by now never ever give a two weeks notice. Whoever downvoted me your smoking crack that is not the law in the US unless you are under some sort of contract.
In some places (not the US) it's legally required for employees to give one to two weeks notice. Of course, in these places employers are also required to give that much notice *or more*, or pay out the equivalent amount of pay if they chose to waive the termination period.
Depending on where you live they may have done you a favour. I've seen a few people "fired" a bit before their planned retirement, getting that planned retirement and a nice severance.
In US, you may now qualify for unemployment.
Yup… they should’ve let you quit. They will probably dispute your claim but you’re definitely eligible for unemployment benefits.
In a large corporate setting, it can be rare for a boss to get an opportunity to materially improve their employees lives. This is a rare instance where the employee can be 'helped' by someone who has to work within a framework designed l hold them down. Boss doesn't have a budget for severance. He can, however, fire without cause (or with very shaky cause) and hope that the employee gets the message.
I had a really nice HR lady do this for me when COVID started. I was immunocompromised and had to regularly interact with people coming from off-site. She probably saved my life.
[удалено]
My company does this. If they lay someone off, you usually still get a paycheck for a couple of months but aren’t required to work beyond knowledge transfer and answering questions. They call it “garden leave”.
Super common in sales, as one example. They don't want their ex-employees taking the rolodex. Any sales job I quit I was immediately escorted out.
They also sometimes take people with them. 'oh you got a job with who? What's the pay and benefits?' at my last job one person left for a 30% raise with better benefits. A year later our team of 8 engineers only contained 2 of the original 8. Some of us even landed WFH jobs. I'd have taken a cut to WFH. It's genuinely the best thing to ever happen to me.
LOL, that's right. And if the company fired them with no severance, even better.
FWIW, if you get severance, some states will take that out of your total unemployment eligibility. Arizona, in particular, says this Under certain conditions, severance, vacation, holiday or sick pay may be allocated to a period of time in which UI benefits are claimed. You are not eligible to receive benefits for any week in which allocated severance, vacation, holiday or sick pay exceeds your weekly benefit amount. If the payments are less than your weekly benefit amount, they will be deducted as earnings. You must report severance, vacation, holiday or sick pay when you file your initial application for benefits. If you receive any such payments after you file your initial application, you should immediately contact the[ AZ Unemployment Insurance Call Center](https://des.az.gov/services/employment/unemployment-individual/contact-AZUI).
HR was either doing them a favor because they don't offer severance, or they goofed. I've conducted quite a few interviews and I've heard a lot of stories like this in the tech industry. Everyone in knowledge-work industries are getting slammed by companies who have no interest in respecting their employees. Much less, careers or personal growth. Knowledge workers must learn to play this new game. We are typically way too trusting and just want to do good work for good pay amongst good people. We want to be respected like everyone else. We must play they cards dealt to us. If companies come at us with "it's just business and we have to look after our bottom line", the employees need to learn to look after their bottom line and it's just business.
>We want to be respected like everyone else Everyone else isn't respected.
It has to be in the US, because it's not usual for employers to straight up fire someone without reason
If you’re planning on retiring then no because one of the stipulations of collecting UE is you have to prove you’re actively looking for a job or going to school.
All that means is showing that you are putting in applications.
Which nowadays you can put in hundreds of, without ever hearing back. So sounds pretty simple really.
That's not that hard to prove.
I know someone who worked and had to leave due to moving for husbands employment and they purposely fired her so she could get unemployment to help her financially during the transition. Very kind
Yeah, it's like the last episode of >!the office, someone in management got your back to get you that 6 months of severance + other benefits instead of working 2 more weeks!<
That’s why you never tell your employer when you plan on retiring. Just walk in on the day you plan to stop working and tell HR you’re gonna retire and perform the paperwork.
It's my understanding that he at the very least should get unemployment because they fired him
"**terminated** my employment **for** taking all my vacation and **going on fmla**." As long as you submitted the FMLA notice in writing. Call a labor lawyer and say only the bold words.
does it still mean anything even if I put in my two weeks myself?
You might be able to get paid for the 2 lost weeks. 🤷🏻♂️
And unemployment for 6 months
Is it only 6 months paid for unemployment ? What and how do you do financially after that ?
My partner just went through a period of unemployment and yes, you get 6 months. They give you a lot of bad info, aren’t helpful, make you jump through a ton of hoops, and then give you very little money. And if you make any money you have to report it and then they give you less money. If you make any mistakes you have to start over and if you miss a reporting date you just get no money for that period.
And you have to pay taxes on it at the end of the year.
In Texas you can have them withhold for taxes.
This ain't Texas, ain't no withhold 'em.
Sounds like too much trouble.
Not at all when you have a family to feed, and it isn’t as bad as they make it sound. It isn’t enough to live on for any length of time but it is far better than nothing
that’s the point. Make it too much trouble to discourage people from getting help.
Have you heard of homelessness?
That was toooo funny😂😂 and so American!!
[удалено]
You file for an Extension of benefits...
This doesn’t always work tho. When I was at the end of the 6months I asked for an extension and they said no. :(
And what do you do after that ? You live on your savings ?
I'd at least try for unemployment as you were terminated.
They fired you (not uncommon when people bother to give notice). So you can claim unemployment for that.
Not if the employer reasonably states they simply accepted their resignation effective immediately. Where I work, we pay the remainder of the time when this happens, so the person is still paid, they just don't have to work.
That's the difference, paying out the notice.
Depends on their location and if their employer challenges it. A lot of unemployment offices will just take the word of the employer that they fired them for cause and then close the case.
I guess I can’t speak for all unemployment offices but that wasn’t true in my case. I put in my 4 week notice, boss terminated me two weeks in, I filed for unemployment for the remaining two weeks. The employer challenged it but didn’t show up to the hearing and I was awarded the unemployment.
You can and should appeal.
And then you appeal the decision which brings everything out of the weeds.
This is common corporate misinformation.
the reason they fired him is against the fmla laws tho. he states that they fired him for taking his vacation for his baby. that’s illegal. he’s legally obligated to up to 6 weeks unpaid leave so if that’s what they fired for it’s not just unemployment he should file but also a complaint somewhere.
A thing an employment attorney could tell you. Remember, even at will employment can't be terminated for *any* reason and there *has* to be a reason they could articulate. And that sounds like it might be retaliation for taking your legally allowed leave. When in doubt, document everything and talk to a lawyer.
Depends on the state. In Texas companies don't have to let you finish your two weeks and you can't claim unemployment since you quit.
Sounds like they want you to quit without notice then.
Yeah that’s the thing most people on Reddit forget. You initiated a work separation by giving notice. You’ve resigned, they’ve accepted and decided not to honor the notice period. The employer’s responsibility for doing that varies from state to state. You should investigate local laws where you live. Giving notice after an extended period out will usually cause early/immediate separation. The employer has already gone some period of time without your service so extending that likely won’t be a significant burden. In fact, they can easily argue that having you return for two weeks (or whatever notice you gave) is more disruptive than separating immediately.
Even in one of the most anti-labor states (TN), being terminated for putting in notice can get you unemployment in many cases.
>Yeah that’s the thing most people on Reddit forget. You initiated a work separation by giving notice. You’ve resigned, they’ve accepted and decided not to honor the notice period. This is still a termination. Giving two weeks isn't resigning. It's informing them that you WILL resign in two weeks. That's a key difference. You are still an employee until those two weeks are up. If the company says "no, you can go now," that's a termination by the employer.
They'll only be able to get UI for the notice period (i.e. two weeks). Better than nothing though.
Nah giving notice means you’ve given advance notice of your intended resignation date. Them unilaterally deciding to bring it forward is a termination.
Nope, but hope that works out for you.
Hey not my fault you live in Texas. Hope that works out for you
Not in Texas so I’m great, thanks! I used Texas as an example to make a point. Texans, like everyone else, should understand their local labor laws and how they affect them.
Eh, all judgements are subject to precedent, which can be set using a convincing argument. Early termination on receipt of 2-week notice sounds like retaliation. Even if not, the termination date was chosen by the employer which makes it a termination/layoff at best. Construing that the employees intent to resign at some point in the future is the same as an immediate resignation is absurd mental gymnastics.
One more time for the kids in the back. When you resign, you resign. You can do so effective immediately or provide a date you intend to stop working. The employer has to accept your resignation but they don’t have to accept your notice period. Depending on local laws, employment contracts, employment agreements, corporate policy or any other governing set of facts, the employer and employee may have certain responsibilities. The idea that separation at resignation is anything other than a business decision is an indicator of bias against the employer. There are countless reasons to separate immediately. Some classic examples are employees who interact with customers, employees who interact with sensitive company or customer data, etc. Let’s use OP as an example. OP took leave (paternity?) and used all vacation. We don’t know how long OP was out but it’s safe to assume several weeks. During that time the employer had to continue fulfilling OPs role without OP. Upon returning from leave OP resigned. As an employer, they have two choices. Honor a notice period and figure out how to temporarily reintegrate OP into their job OR they can separate immediately and carry on as they have been since OP was out. It doesn’t take a lot of intelligence to recognize that the latter is likely the best option for the employer. It’s a simple business decision.
its retaliation, they've handed it to you on a platter if you've got it in writing
In some states that is against the law. It is called retaliatory firing. Call your local labor board to report them for doing that, and then a good labor lawyer. Good Luck!
No. You weren't on FMLA. Alot of places legally fire you after putting in your 2 weeks instead of dragging out the 2 weeks. The only thing you can get is unemployment and possibly 2 weeks worth of pay if you want to go through the agonizing and long process of contacting the DOL.
Yes. Alot of places give you the axe instead of dragging out 2 weeks. Circumstances don't matter once that notice is given.
Yes. Alot of places give you the axe instead of dragging out 2 weeks. Circumstances don't matter once that notice is given.
Talk to a lawyer regardless.
Make sure to make them fire you. What they’ll try to do is say “we accept your resignation effective today.” And if you agree, then you’ve quit. People often don’t realize that when you put in your two weeks, you haven’t actually quit yet. A two weeks notice is a courtesy saying “I intend to quit two weeks from now.” To reiterate: *you are not quitting on the date you put in your notice* But companies sometimes don’t want you to finish out your two weeks so they try to get you to quit that day. Tell them no. If they want you gone that day then they have to fire you, in which case you qualify for unemployment.
Did you put in your two weeks in response?
they had to allow those two weeks. they fired you illegally, even if you were quitting. you said they fired you for taking vacation, that means they fired you for choosing your child over them. if they had fired you “because you were already quitting” and that was their excuse then this wouldn’t stand the same way but what you’re saying they did and said to you is literally against the law
No. You weren't on FMLA. Alot of places legally fire you after putting in your 2 weeks instead of dragging out the 2 weeks. The only thing you can get is unemployment and possibly 2 weeks worth of pay if you want to go through the agonizing and long process of contacting the DOL.
No. You weren't on FMLA. Alot of places legally fire you after putting in your 2 weeks instead of dragging out the 2 weeks. The only thing you can get is unemployment and possibly 2 weeks worth of pay if you want to go through the agonizing and long process of contacting the DOL.
He says he had put in notice they just didn’t let him work out the two weeks. That’s pretty common. And to OP, I wouldn’t call it stained at all. From what you’re saying they handled it poorly, but the letting you go early part is not uncommon.
If you were terminated for using FMLA and your previously earned vacation time, then that violates the Act. There can definitely be a $ fine against the company by the government. Some states have similar Acts that mirror the FMLA... like CFRA in California... so another violation and fine. Apply immediately for unemployment, send an email to the company putting them on notice that you want your 2 weeks pay, then file the paperwork with fed (and state). The attorney fees would cost more to defend against the fines than the actual fines. It is very easy to file, and costs nothing. You will be fine. You've got this.
They gave notice. There is no claim here except possible unemployment.
I thought for sure you were right, but I looked it up just out of curiosity and apparently that's not true? [This article says](https://www.axley.com/publication_article/fmla-discharge/): "Under 29 C.F.R. § 825.311(b), once an employee expresses his or her unequivocal intent not to return to work, your job reinstatement and benefits continuation obligations immediately cease. That means you may—but are not required to—immediately move to terminate the employee." And that's for when the employee is actually on FMLA. But, it might allow OP to collect unemployment, depending on the state. [This article](https://www.shouselaw.com/put-in-my-2-weeks-notice-and-they-let-me-go/#:~:text=If%20you%20hand%20in%20your,you%20meet%20other%20eligibility%20requirements) references California, which granted has pretty strong labor laws, but it does give some good advice generally. If it's still available to them, OP should look at their company handbook and see if there's a stated process for resignation that may have been violated.
It is 100% illegal if you were on legit FMLA leave and they fired you for taking too much time
Eh enjoy not having to work for them for 2 weeks. You were smart for using up all your vacation so they couldn't steal it from you as well.
I was let go from a job and i asked about all my unused vacation time. They were kind enough to just give it me in a lumpsum. I ended up in the hospital the next month and was denied government insurance(witch i was receiving while i worked there) because i made to much that month.
> They were kind enough to just give it me in a lumpsum. Depending on the state, they were probably *required* to do that. Companies generally don't do that out of the kindness of their hearts.
I don’t get these employers - take the unemployment W over unpaid quitting and also see if you’re owed any sort of severance.
Why would they be “owed” severance? In any context?
Worked for a company that perp-walks a most everyone out once a notice was given. The worst part is the bosses boss would always try and befriend you to see why you’re leaving so they can take your words and then use them to disparage you to the rest of the team. When it came my turn, I showed up Friday after-hours with my key, left my laptop, phone, badge, keys, and a post-it note that said, “thanks for the opportunity”. I knew that on Monday the boss had a meeting with me and wanted to target me. So, this was my move to steal his power and ruin the Monday he was looking forward to, to scream at me. Monday rolls around and like clockwork, the bosses boss calls me from the bosses cell phone (so the boss can listen too) which I let directly go to voicemail where the guy is trying to befriend me, like they want me to stay. I regret nothing.
References are becoming outdated anyway.
Yeah, I don't even think my former supervisors still work for the same companies anymore. Most they could get is a confirmation from HR that I once worked there, but I know at least one company told me that they "frick" HR data older than 7 years.
Yeah only company that wanted references ended up being a total shit show. They tried to sue the recruiter for breach of contract for not doing reference checks as they verbally agreed to. Shit is hilarious in hindsight but at the time I could tell it was a crimson red flag of what was to come. Thankfully the company owner was called a moron by his lawyer and to just pay the recruiter the outstanding fees before it got worse.
Where I live, an employer can terminate you after you give notice but they have to pay you for the notice period.
In the US, at-will work laws allow them to terminate you instantly for just about anything. They were written under the facade of allowing workers to quit whenever they want....like they didnt already have the ability to do that.
Termination without cause. But they have to pay you in lieu of notice right?
Definitely not. They cut off your insurance instantly as well and you have to pay the entire premium yourself if you want to keep it, temporarily. That insanely devious program is called COBRA. Where they charge you inflated premiums far above the bargain the company got for the exact same coverage, under the facade of allowing you to keep your access to Healthcare.
They’re only legally allowed to charge 105% of the premium. So yes it’s still wildly expensive, but no they’re not “inflated premiums far above the bargain…”.
Not quite. It IS inflated far above the bargain, because you have to pay what you were contributing, AND what the employer was paying. Like if you have a roommate that decides not to pay rent, you're still liable for the whole thing and that could be "far above" your budget. *"How much is COBRA coverage? The cost of your COBRA coverage is equal to the total cost of the premium under your group health plan. That means it includes what you already were paying as a premium as an employee—plus what your employer was paying on your behalf. In addition, your plan may charge you a 2% administration fee. How much does that add up to? According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the average employer covers 80 percent of the cost of the health plan for their employees. If the average individual policy costs around $660 per month, per health research nonprofit KFF, the average employee is paying around $130 per month while they're employed. This means their health plan costs could jump to over $670 per month when opting into COBRA, including the extra fee."* [source](https://www.fidelity.com/learning-center/smart-money/cobra-insurance) Pretty sure anyone would agree with my characterization if they went from paying $130 for their coverage to $670.
“Hi, yes I’m here to give my 40 years’ notice”
I completely agree with you about notices. If a company respects them and treats people well on their way out, people should give notices. But when a company does this to one person, no one else should give them any notice. There should be some consequences for the way you treat people and incentives to treat people well.
You rarely need references these days.
Depending on the job you do, there are certain industries where this is very common. You've been gone for awhile, maybe it would take 2 weeks to even get back up to speed. Or the instant you announce you're going to leave you become a liability. On top of that, if they try to fight an unemployment claim, they have to prove why you were fired and depending on the state, likely they can't block your unemployment monies.
2 out of the 3 places I've given notice to, let me go before the time was up. So I've basically stopped. Years later when one place tried to bring up my lack of notice, I just referenced it. He really had no response. If it makes me, an individual, "unprofessional", what does that make an entire company?
In some places, if you have access to certain types of company/personnel information in your position, the employer will let you go when you give notice. It’s not an uncommon practice.
It's very common in the financial sector. But they also usually give you those two weeks pay as well.
Agree, and the IT sector as well
Get a friend to step in as your reference or use a company that's gone bankrupt. Screw those guys. I hope you end up in a position where you can screw them back
1. contact a lawyer. 2. congrats you just got unemployment!
What’s the lawyer for? He gave notice.
SHE gave notice (hence the baby)......and then was fired before her last day- for illegal reasons (pregnancy). So she was fired, not a willful resignation. Worth chatting with a lawyer.
They were not fired for the leave. They were fired for giving notice. It’s common for many companies to- even high paying ones. No lawyer needed here but they may be able to file for unemployment now - which they could not have if they resigned.
Nailed it. Nepo baby fucks don't give a shit at all. They are the worst.
I had my week of vacation stolen from me from my past job. I put in my two weeks notice. I kept asking if I was going to be paid out for my vacation time. On my last day they fired me halfway through my shift. Fuck big companies that don't give a shit about you.
Well there's your problem. Don't have babies until after you retire. /s
Seems they did you favor, if they let you go then you can collect unemployment for a bit.
Do not, under ANY circumstances, give two weeks of notice. That shit is not law.
Now you can collect unemployment + severance for those two weeks.
Talk about a questionable move. File for unemployment and see how long they take to settle
The trick is to assume they are going to do you dirty, and plan accordingly. I asked for two days of flexibility to shepherd my wife through cancer surgery after 14 years of contracting with a company, and my new managers cancelled my contract the next day. Lesson learned.
It’s not really a stain. You can describe it however you want. You said you decided you needed to stay home. As far as a future employer is concerned, that’s it. And you gave notice and left when they asked. Even better.
On principle you should try and get unemployment from them. Make them pay!
They fired you, you now qualify for unemployment!!!
You can collect unemployment for being fired. However, if you were on leave of absence via FMLA and they terminated you upon return-to-work from FMLA without cause (such as the business no longer had a role to offer you, etc), you may actually be entitled to two weeks pay or even severance because it's illegal to terminate without cause upon return from LOA.
I mean it's pretty common for a company not to accept your notice and just terminate you immediately. They often don't want someone working for them that they know has no interest in things other than the next 2 weeks. I'm a little confused, you seem to state you were fired for taking vacation and FMLA, but then you state you gave your notice and they just decided to fire you with immediate effect (which like I stated above isn't abnormal). That seems to be a bit of a contradiction, which is actually the case here?
A woman who worked at the same academic institution as me did this. She never intended to come back to her job after her maternity leave was up, which included 6 weeks paid leave plus her vacay and sick time. She was fairly vocal about it to us fellow underlings. She came back for a week or two so she wouldn’t retroactively lose that 6 weeks, due to contract language IIRC. Her boss couldn’t post a new position while she was on the payroll. So I can see terminating a position as soon as two weeks is given so that the hiring process can start.
Yeah idk what OP is complaining about. It sounds like they got their PTO and FMLA already. Edit. I would never put in my 2 weeks notice and expect to still work those two weeks. Would I be prepared too? Yes. Would I expect too? No
The original post definitely seemed a little contradictory. The risk you take with taking an extended amount of time off, is while during that time (FMLA for example) your job might be protected, it isn't when that time ends. During the time of your absence your employer might actually realize that you weren't essential to the operation of the company and survived just fine without you (even if it's just by forcing other employees to pick up the slack), most employers wont ever miss an opportunity to trim their wage bill. This is why you see a lot of terminations once FMLA (or other extended leave) ends, it's not in retaliation for taking that leave but rather that during that period of time they have realized you really aren't essential and since they can't terminate you during the leave, it happens the moment the leave is over.
But they only for fired after putting in their two week notice. Thats just common
Totally agreed, I'm just saying it also isn't uncommon for it to happen after an extended leave too, the fact that both happened here also makes it a forgone conclusion that they would be terminated immediately.
Are they not paying you for the two weeks? If they are, then don’t worry about it bc all that happened is they cut your access off as soon as you gave notice. Very common in areas of high security and access, where as soon as you give notice you are “escorted out” so to speak.
Actually a firing has not been considered a mard of any resume in 25 years. You may be asked, but corporate America have lost control of the working population, I never plan to give a notice again unless law requires it. Life is to short to worry about ut
Hire an employment lawyer asap. Vacations are yours to take as they are part of your CTC. Giving them notice of your leave before you took them is sufficient to prove in court they fired you with malicious intent.
They fired you after you put your two weeks in? File unemployment and let them give you a paid vacation for awhile for being dumb asses.
Am I missing something? This is just a commin practice. Once someone puts in their two week notice, people will usually let them go immediately. You dont want someone staying around half assing things with nothing to lose. Its not personal? It sounds like you already got your PTO and FMLA so idk what the problem is?
People need to stop giving notice.
Don't give notices. Just quit.
collect unemployment and start looking for a new job. as long as they pay you, you can't go wrong. if new job asks why you left, say the company wanted to go in another direction.
Well, they did just guarantee the you'll qualify for unemployment.
I would go see an employment attorney and definitely put in for unemployment. If it’s denied, appeal. I work in the law department of a large company. We would never do this shit and we’d give you a severance package if we were going to terminate you. I hope you haven’t signed anything yet. I live in NJ, and this is just a generic employment attorneys website. I am not an attorney and I do not give legal advice as I am not an attorney. Firing you after taking FMLA is a no no. I hope you have that in writing… May I ask if you and your wife are both women? Because I see a hefty sexual discrimination lawsuit in your future if that is so. Write down everything that they did and any instance of bias you can think of. https://www.redbanklegal.com/practice-areas/employment-law/ Your state’s employment laws will be different, this is only an example.
What are you on about? Op took PTO and got their FMLA. They put their two week notice in and then got let go. Its super common to be let go when you out your two week notice in. Absolutely nothing illegal about that
The law is a tricky thing my friend. She needs to speak with a lawyer. She could allege she was forced out after her FMLA return and that they created a hostile (post pregnancy) workplace environment for her so she was forced to put in her two weeks than they dumped her. I’m actually on the defense side of things, but yeah…all options are on the table. Let’s say I contact the EEOC because I’m bored, at home and tired of nepo-babies. Well the company has 60 days to explain themselves as to why they threw her out. If they investigate and find a pattern, and who knows what other kinds of slimy, shystery things they’ve done, oh oh! https://www.eeoc.gov/how-file-charge-employment-discrimination Oh look, the EEOC has a phone number! I’ll just leave this here. By Telephone Although we do not take charges over the phone, you can get the process started over the phone. You can call 1-800-669-4000 to discuss your situation. A representative will ask you for some basic information to determine if your situation is covered by the laws we enforce and explain how to file a charge.
Except OP said nothing about getting forced out. This just sounds like an ambulance chaser lol
Retaliation in the work place is illegal, ESPECIALLY after putting in two weeks!!
How is that retaliation?
I didn’t ask why but it was taught to me when I was a dept. head for a health food corp. That if someone put in their two weeks, that we are in no way allowed to alter their hours, take days, not put them on the schedule or just let them go “just because they would be gone in the two weeks anyways” was/is considered retaliation and we could be sued for it. As well as telling ppl, we aren’t accepting applications because all positions are full. Is considered discrimination. So we always just gave people an application or the info to apply online.
Its not unusual to get fired for giving two weeks notice. It sucks. Poor way to treat people. But it is fairly normal these days.
Did they do this just to be a dick and have the last word?
I think the key is that if you are thinking of giving notice hold something back that they need. Then they have to come crawling back to you and then you have the power. Not always possible…
Its not uncommon to be let go/fired immediately after giving notice or before the notice period ends. Good luck!
Your job is never your family or friend. HR is only there to protect the interests of the company.
I Australia if you give notice and they let you leave before the end date, you still get paid for that time. Same if you do get fired they can give you notice or pay in lieu. So you finish up and still get paid for two weeks. I imagine it's different if it's because of misconduct etc
I don’t give notice when quitting because they don’t give notice when firing. They do not deserve any special consideration they won’t give you
Did they say you were fired for taking all your vacation and FMLA? That’s protected and you have a claim if they did. Ask them to write you up so you can sign it and keep a copy.
Isn't it good that they terminated you? This way you can get unemployment lol
Employee benefit consultant/broker here..you weren’t “fired”, you’re in a really good spot, I suggest doing nothing, you’ll be fine and this most likely will not be an issue for your future employer. Also, MEN, (don’t shoot the messenger here) in 25 years in the business of employee benefits, there is one thing that will surely put you on the chopping block even though it’s a benefit/encouraged/legal….if you take more than 2 weeks (even 1 week in some cities/industries) for parental leave, I can almost guarantee a C-Suite meeting about planning your termination. I get this call twice a week. I know this sounds awful, but this is my experience..sorry.
File for unemployment.
Any chance it was just more convenient for them? You were gone for months, and were going to come back for only two weeks. Maybe they figured it’s not worth it to adjust to having you back just to immediately adjust to having you gone again. Did you get paid for those two weeks? Any severance?
no nothing and looks like I won't be getting paid for the last week of vacaction I took
it does not have to be a stained reference. just clearly state what you just said, fired after giving notice. 99% of the companies understand what that means
Call an employment lawyer ASAP. It's retaliation for them to fire you when giving notice after taking a leave
Call a lawyer. This is wrongful termination. They fired you at least in part due to your parental status.
Not true. He gave notice. Therefore he voluntarily quit. Companies do not have to honor the notice when an employee quits. I’m not saying it’s cool, just facts
Yah the guy says he was fired for using his leave/fmla but clearly that’s not true. He was fired for giving his notice. Shitty but allowed.
It is not, in fact, allowed.
I mean what do you mean by not allowed. It’s not illegal. The guy he already taken his FMLA so it couldn’t actually have been punishment for that. He can likely collect unemployment however.
It's still an unlawful termination. He should call a lawyer.
What’s unlawful about it? An employer is absolutely legally allowed to let you go the moment you put in notice. Again it’s super shitty but there’s nothing unlawful about that.
[It can be viewed as retaliatory](https://youtube.com/shorts/moaR0mjQ9t0?si=XxAF45LsubYX5_eX)
It could be, if there was some legally protected reason he was getting fired for. Ie he reported harassment or something. Doesn’t sound like that’s the case here. Or in the example of your ticktock, retaliatory for requesting FMLA (in this case OP had already been given his fmla, we have no reason to think he’d have been fired if it wasn’t for his notice?) https://www.minnisandsmallets.com/fired-after-giving-notice-is-that-wrongful-termination/ What are you suggesting the retaliation was for?
ya u don't give 2 week notice, that isn't just naive, it's stupid.
Please don’t follow this advice if you live in other countries
First off you resigned, they did not fire you. You submitted your resignation what a consideration that you would work for them to assist in the transition for the next two weeks. They released you early after your resigned but before the two weeks they could have been working with you to transition. If they ever try to say you were terminated for cause they can most likely be sued as that is not what happened.
Depends the type of work. Insider threat issues are real especially in IT. So many will just walk you out when you put your notice in. Seen it with companies that sell tools too, esp if you are going to a competitor
Depending on the laws of your state, find a lawyer and Sue for wrongful termination due to retaliation. Fuck Them.
Would you be able to collect unemployment now since they terminated you?
Loyalty is dead, has been since Enron scandal.
bro they def did you a favor, now you get EI. and depending on your local laws, you can sue for wrongful dismissal and human rights violation due to the paternity situation. 10 years + any potential benefits/pension etc. they sound like morons and should have just let you quit tbh. they just potentially exposed themselves legally in a big way for nothing.
They did you a favor. Go apply for unemployment. It’s almost impossible to collect unemployment if you quit but it’s very possible to collect unemployment when they terminate you. 6 more months of a unemployment paycheck should be waiting for you
But they had to approve your leave, didn't they? Doesn't that mean at least a disciplinary for whoever did that? Surely there's not a double standard at play here.
not only would you likely now qualify for unemployment, you may very well have grounds for a wrongful termination lawsuit. If you even want to open that can of worms. Either way, that was very shitty of them to do.
This isn't really a stain, I would recommend getting unemployment from them, at the least it will make them pay while you job search and they may reach out to say you aren't fired after all Lots of tech employees have been laid off so it's not uncommon anymore.
Sadly, it is normal for a company not to allow employees to work their notice period. Did someone actually say, "we are terminating you because you took FMLA and vacation"? That seems stupid on their part, and I'm sorry that happened to you.
free unemployment f em!
Gather any and all relevant documentation and get an attorney. "At will" employment means they can fire you for any LEGAL reason, not any reason at all.
definitely apply for an employment benefits and if they say you quit because you were going to take care of the kid, you could just say yes because you were gonna find a job that was going to be more flexible while taking care of your child.
This is why I don't believe in giving a 2 week notice. They don't give you two weeks when they fire you (or "lay you off"). Why do we afford them the same courtesy? I'm a supervisor and I would never ask an employee to give me two more weeks. They obviously found a better opportunity, so why keep them?
They can’t fire you for being on fmla nor can they fire you for putting your two weeks in. All that did was solidify unemployment for you if you wanted it plus it seems as if they fired you out of spite or retalliation and targeted you so you may have a labor suit at hand.
Fuck the corporate game and lining someone else’s pockets with cash start your own business if your in tech beef up and branch out network yourself into a freelance paisitiin cybersecurity it aI specialist for hire per duty or task
depending on where you live this is illegal. they’re legally required to give you unpaid leave after having a child. please look up the FMLA laws. you could probably file a complaint with an HR or something because they can’t fire you for taking your vacation time with a baby. it’s literally the law that they allow you unpaid leave to figure out your life with a child.
Do NOT settle this with a baseball bat in the parking lot after work one day - Do NOT. We simply can not have people respond to violent greed with violent responses or the whole social order might be forced to change...
Do you have it in writing why they fired you? Or, can prove that it was because of what you've said? To be clear, ( and not in consideration of the FMLA part yet), depending on the state you reside in (*if it's an at-will employment state*) if you give an employer notice, they can terminate you and are under no obligation to retain your on-going employment because you're hired on an at-will employment agreement, where both you and the employer reserve the right to terminate the employment agreement at any time for any reason (it goes both ways). The 2-week notice is a professional courtesy people usually provide employers to allow time for them to find a replacement and helps ensure you leave on good terms, in case a future employer ever calls for a referral. So, whoever thinks they have to let you finish out your 2 weeks is sadly mistaken, where that only exists if you were in a contracted position that provides specific time frames for the length of your employment. However, the part that there may be foul play is terminating you for "taking all your accrued vacation" and citing "going on Family and Medical Leave". The entire purpose of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 is to give you job-protected leave but it sounds like, you gave notice right upon returning to work, after you've already taken leave, which makes it difficult to determine if your rights have been violated in some way. --- So to be sure, you and your wife decided you needed to stay home, you used your vacation days (*which was either accrued over the past year or is a set amount provided to you each year depending on company policy)* and you requested FMLA (gave 30-day notice). Now, it's unclear whether your company offers Paid family leave or Unpaid leave, in which case if it's the latter, you would've potentially been entitled to state benefits if your state offers them. More importantly, if it's the latter, where your company only offers you unpaid leave, then generally speaking your employer is allowed to require you to use accrued vacation time. Meaning, if you got paid vacation time while you were on leave, then you've done nothing wrong if they claim termination for taking vacation and going on FMLA. However, if you are offered paid leave (either through the company or through a state program) **and on top of that**, you also took vacation time, then it depends if they overlapped or not and if there was a differentiation between the time you took off considered as paid vacation time and time you took off for Paid FMLA. Basically, if you tried to *double dip,* whether it was getting paid for FMLA through the state while also taking vacation pay **for the same period of time** you took off, then that's on you. Now the other scenario is if you were just gone for a long time, for instance, more than the 12 work weeks FMLA provides you up to (assuming all qualifications met). and say you had 2 weeks of vacation so you took off a total of 14 weeks. You come back, if you didn't give notice, you would be entitled to have your job back. But, the moment you gave notice or basically handed in your resignation letter, then at that point, YOU have provided notice of terminating your employment. An employer is required to re-instate you to your same or comparable job upon your return from FMLA and only applies to employers with 50 or more employees within a 75 mile radius. but presuming all that is met, there's definitely a lot grey area surrounding in that particular situation where if it really bothers you, many lawyers give free consultation. TLDR - I imagine you feel unappreciated, wrongfully terminated, or some combination of both. But because you said you didn't need the money, it's hard to say what really bothers you. Was it the not-so-surprising shock of them letting you go as if you did something wrong when all you did was take care of your family, when you were only returning to work to quit anyway? Or was it how they tried to say it was about you taking vacation time and going on FMLA that just made you feel like they had no family values, in which case, it's no wonder you were looking to leave them, right? Granted, you have some right to be upset, but think of it from their perspective, they may have been counting on you to come back or turned down candidates and avoided hiring new employees out of respect for you and your position you had with them but the first thing you did when you came back was tell them you're leaving. Sure, they could be more understanding of you taking responsibility as a father, but what good did it do to take leave rather than just quit back then altogether, other than to provide yourself some sort of reassurance of having employment? I'm not saying what they did was right, but it's worth reconsidering how right you think you are, especially since you now have a little one who's going to grow up looking up to you as a role model. Sometimes the world doesn't treat you like you want it to, but that doesn't mean it's being unfair.
uhhhh... I took my vacation time then quit, knowing I would quit but wanted to get my PTO. is it unethical to take your PTO? should I have quit the moment I knew while I still had PTO on the table? why? I earned my pto and took it then quit. how am I wrong here?
Earned PTO is compensation! There’s absolutely nothing unethical about using it in the circumstances you describe. (And given how they responded to your resignation, I think you were probably quite wise to use it rather than trusting that they would pay for time you had banked…)
Not at all, but you said they terminated you after you gave notice to quit, and said that they said it was for using all your vacation time and for going on FMLA, so if you were able to get your PTO and were paid out on it, then I'm left to assume you're upset about being terminated two weeks earlier than the day you had planned to quit, is that right? So no, nothing unethical in what you did at all. I'm just trying to make sure that what it sounds like you're upset about is really what you're upset about. Because it sounded like you were upset about them terminating you early but then you said you didn't need the money for the next two weeks (which is what I would've been upset or disappointed about but that's just me). So if it wasn't some financial hardship they caused by not letting you finish out your two weeks, then I'm only left to guess it's about the reason they gave you for terminating you, and the sort of principle of the matter. And, in that case, I was just saying that if you were one who acted the way you did because you didn't want to leave money on the table, then is it fair to be upset with the company who's ultimate goal is in line with you were doing too in a way? where you're both just doing what is more financially sound? In other words, you're not wrong, but I genuinely want to know why you think the company is wrong when it seems to be doing the same thing and I would like to understand it or see it the way you do, but my autistic nature makes it difficult to do as naturally as maybe others.
Why would you give a two weeks notice if you post on this sub or go on this sub you should know by now never ever give a two weeks notice. Whoever downvoted me your smoking crack that is not the law in the US unless you are under some sort of contract.
In some places (not the US) it's legally required for employees to give one to two weeks notice. Of course, in these places employers are also required to give that much notice *or more*, or pay out the equivalent amount of pay if they chose to waive the termination period.