Husband turned in two week notice....

[Rumpus]

I think it's different when a company goes through layoffs, because employees will be mad, disgruntled even and there is a chance of foul play. Very different from an employee who may be grateful for the employment experience but ready to move on with another organization (while wanting to leave a door open for the future).

And very different in that same company for people with different job descriptions. Anything that came under the regulation of the SEC gave the leaving employee two weeks of their pay and they did not have to come to work. If they were terminated, they had severance pay which could extend much longer depending upon the length of service. Other areas, employees stayed their two weeks. In other departments where jobs were eliminated, employees were asked to stay on and complete the job. Sometimes 3 weeks, sometimes 6 months.

 

[Planogirl]

I think that requiring two weeks notice is ludicrous if the company ends up just telling you to leave and not paying you. What's the point in that case?

I had no idea that companies were routinely behaving so unprofessionally.

 

[manning]

My DH was just telling me the other day that in IL, if you give writen 2 week notice and your company chooses to just send you home that day, they are required by law to pay you the two weeks. I don't know if that's true (DH sometimes makes up things in his own head ) but that's what he told me.

At my company if you give your notice, you keep working. Only those fired for cause are escourted out after they clean their desks.

Maybe he is confusing it with federal law that states any company over a certain size (forgot how many) has a cut back those cut are paid two months from date of notification plus vacation pay and the company has the choice of working them the two months or letting them go.

 

[bicker]

No one is required to provide two week's notice, unless they sign a specific agreeing to that requirement.

 

[bettymae1121]

Maybe he is confusing it with federal law that states any company over a certain size (forgot how many) has a cut back those cut are paid two months from date of notification plus vacation pay and the company has the choice of working them the two months or letting them go.

That could be, like I said, he makes things up in his own head a lot. I don't mean he lies, he'll just read two or three different things and get them mixed up.

 

[DVCBELLE]

Op - your husband should be eligible for Cobra - so you don't need to worry about health insurance - that will cover you until the new one kicks in...the best thing about Cobra is that it is retroactive - so if his benefits start in 30 days then you can wait and see if you want to pay for Cobra or not based on if your medical bills in that time frame are necessary.

 

[taitai]

I think that requiring two weeks notice is ludicrous if the company ends up just telling you to leave and not paying you. What's the point in that case?

I had no idea that companies were routinely behaving so unprofessionally.

There is nothing unprofessional about this. He is leaving to go to a competitor. He agreed to work for this company and now he has said I am no longer going to work for you, I am going to work for the competition. There is no requirement that the company keep him employed AFTER HE QUIT. Sometimes, in certain positions, a company might keep an employee on for a period of time to smooth a transition but they have no requirement to do so. In most cases, especially when an employee is going to a competitor, he or she is escorted out that very day.

There is nothing unprofessional about it. Even if the employee contract states that an employee must give 2 weeks notice in order to receive final benefits, it does not say that a company has to keep the employee on for those two weeks.

It would be equally easy to say it was incredibly unprofessional for the OP's husband to agree to work for this company and then quit. The business world simply does not work this way. It is in the OP's DH's best interests to do whatever his former employer wants and to keep as good a relationship as possible with them. Who knows, this new position might not work out and he might need those contacts again some day.

 

[jodifla]

There is nothing unprofessional about this. He is leaving to go to a competitor. He agreed to work for this company and now he has said I am no longer going to work for you, I am going to work for the competition. There is no requirement that the company keep him employed AFTER HE QUIT. Sometimes, in certain positions, a company might keep an employee on for a period of time to smooth a transition but they have no requirement to do so. In most cases, especially when an employee is going to a competitor, he or she is escorted out that very day.

There is nothing unprofessional about it. Even if the employee contract states that an employee must give 2 weeks notice in order to receive final benefits, it does not say that a company has to keep the employee on for those two weeks.

It would be equally easy to say it was incredibly unprofessional for the OP's husband to agree to work for this company and then quit. The business world simply does not work this way. It is in the OP's DH's best interests to do whatever his former employer wants and to keep as good a relationship as possible with them. Who knows, this new position might not work out and he might need those contacts again some day.

It works BOTH ways. A person will think twice -- and three times -- before they return to work for a company that treated them like a common criminal when they turned in their notice.

No WONDER everyone is going to work for the competition.

 

[taitai]

It works BOTH ways. A person will think twice -- and three times -- before they return to work for a company that treated them like a common criminal when they turned in their notice.

No WONDER everyone is going to work for the competition.

I missed the part where they treated him like a common criminal. What did they do? I just reread the thread and didn't catch it. Did it get deleted?

I don't understand the outrage here. He QUIT. When you quit you are saying you are done. So, they said, Well, we will miss you. Best of luck. Please give the keys to your car and all your business equipment to HR on your way out. His goal was to leave. Why is everyone so upset that they actually said, yes, leave. Wy should the company keep in the building someone who has so little loyalty he searched for, interviewed for, and TOOK A JOB with a competitor? He didn't keep his commitment to them, why should they keep him around? I really don't get it.

 

[SaraJayne]

There is nothing unprofessional about this. He is leaving to go to a competitor. He agreed to work for this company and now he has said I am no longer going to work for you, I am going to work for the competition. There is no requirement that the company keep him employed AFTER HE QUIT. Sometimes, in certain positions, a company might keep an employee on for a period of time to smooth a transition but they have no requirement to do so. In most cases, especially when an employee is going to a competitor, he or she is escorted out that very day.

There is nothing unprofessional about it. Even if the employee contract states that an employee must give 2 weeks notice in order to receive final benefits, it does not say that a company has to keep the employee on for those two weeks.

It would be equally easy to say it was incredibly unprofessional for the OP's husband to agree to work for this company and then quit. The business world simply does not work this way. It is in the OP's DH's best interests to do whatever his former employer wants and to keep as good a relationship as possible with them. Who knows, this new position might not work out and he might need those contacts again some day.

 

[Mrs. Charming]

This thread begs the question- In 2011, in this current "economy" and sad state of affiars we live in, what exactly should an employee do? Not give notice if he/she can't afford 2 unpaid weeks? Not leave a job? Walk in and say "I quit!" and that's it? I hear of all these situations of people being escorted out ASAP, but what is one to do? It used to be a courtesy to give 2 weeks notice, but there's no courtesy in that any longer since the position is going to be vacant from the moment of resignation. In all seriousness, what is an employee to do?

Oh, and why does Canada have such a bad rap in the US when it seems to have it's "stuff" straight?

 

[TheFTs]

Ouch! this would cause a national outcry in the UK! If you give notice, you work it - unless you're in a place of special security, nothing will change until you leave - I'm currently working my notice and start a new role next week, and my Bosses are SO supportive... I'm stunned at some of what I've read - surely Companies trust their employees otherwise they would sack them?

 

[taitai]

This thread begs the question- In 2011, in this current "economy" and sad state of affiars we live in, what exactly should an employee do? Not give notice if he/she can't afford 2 unpaid weeks? Not leave a job? Walk in and say "I quit!" and that's it? I hear of all these situations of people being escorted out ASAP, but what is one to do? It used to be a courtesy to give 2 weeks notice, but there's no courtesy in that any longer since the position is going to be vacant from the moment of resignation. In all seriousness, what is an employee to do?

Oh, and why does Canada have such a bad rap in the US when it seems to have it's "stuff" straight?

That is a great point. In this economy, where jobs are so scarce, EVERY employee should be saving like mad so they have the cushion to be unemployed for several months. If you think you are going to leave or be fired, bank your vacation and personal days. Every single place I have worked pay those out in a lump sum when you leave. Save like crazy. Be prepared.

Employees should also understand the options they might face. It might make leaving less attractive and if they are truly miserable that is unfortunate. However, no one benefits from going in blind. It seems as if the OP's spouse was really blindsided by being asked to leave and that is unfortunate. Everyone else should learn from his experience and make sure they are prepared in such an eventuality.

 

[kwelch10377]

This thread begs the question- In 2011, in this current "economy" and sad state of affiars we live in, what exactly should an employee do? Not give notice if he/she can't afford 2 unpaid weeks? Not leave a job? Walk in and say "I quit!" and that's it? I hear of all these situations of people being escorted out ASAP, but what is one to do? It used to be a courtesy to give 2 weeks notice, but there's no courtesy in that any longer since the position is going to be vacant from the moment of resignation. In all seriousness, what is an employee to do?

Oh, and why does Canada have such a bad rap in the US when it seems to have it's "stuff" straight?

I agree....

I wonder how many companies are shooting themselves in the foot by doing this. Imagine how many of their customers are being ticked off because they can't get a hold of the person they need to deal with and they aren't aware there is a new contact because the person left. The company leaves themselves scrambling to figure out where that ex-employee was at with everything. That 2 weeks notice helps prevent that since the person and their boss should be using that time to contact customer and let them know what is going on and transiting their workload.

At least if the company is going to fire someone they are aware ahead of time that they are firing this person and they will have to deal with their customers and whatnot.

 

[taitai]

Ouch! this would cause a national outcry in the UK! If you give notice, you work it - unless you're in a place of special security, nothing will change until you leave - I'm currently working my notice and start a new role next week, and my Bosses are SO supportive... I'm stunned at some of what I've read - surely Companies trust their employees otherwise they would sack them?

It isn't always an issue of trust although sometimes that is it. He is leaving to go to the competition so it is an issue of business survival. I am in marketing/advertising. Let's say my firm is aggressively going after the Pepsi account. We have done copious research, focus groups, planning, etc. to get the Pepsi account. I take a job with a competitor who also really wants the lucrative Pepsi advertising account. Does it make sense for my bosses to keep me in strategy meetings for two full weeks where I am going to learn EVERYTHING my old firm is planning to do to win the Pepsi account only to go to the competition? That is incredibly stupid in a business sense. So, they don't send me to any of those meetings which account for 90% of my time. Does it make sense for them to keep me in the office, at my desk, surfing the internet and online shopping for two weeks being completely unproductive as they can no longer, realistically, use me? No, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense either. So, they accept my resignation and wish me well. Really, nothing else makes good business sense.

 

[snowywhite89]

This thread begs the question- In 2011, in this current "economy" and sad state of affiars we live in, what exactly should an employee do? Not give notice if he/she can't afford 2 unpaid weeks? Not leave a job? Walk in and say "I quit!" and that's it? I hear of all these situations of people being escorted out ASAP, but what is one to do? It used to be a courtesy to give 2 weeks notice, but there's no courtesy in that any longer since the position is going to be vacant from the moment of resignation. In all seriousness, what is an employee to do?

Oh, and why does Canada have such a bad rap in the US when it seems to have it's "stuff" straight?

You still give the two weeks notice. That is the professional way to leave a job. Saying "I quit" only feels good for about 3 seconds and it burns a bridge for life. You may need to return to this company in the future. They will only take you back if you were professional in your last impression you left them with.

Since you will have very little time off in the new company use the two weeks to relax and then hit the ground running at your new job so you can WOW the new employer.

With the way the economy is one needs to be able to absorb more than two weeks without pay. Start now building up your emergency fund so you can enjoy that two week vacation.


BTW when I chose to give a company two weeks I knew that would be my last day. I had already removed all personal stuff from my office the week or two before giving notice. I was paid for the two weeks but I did not expect it or need it to make it to the next job. What the OP's DH experienced is nothing new. I left in a professional manner and I was told I was eligible for rehire.

 

[bicker]

You still give the two weeks notice. That is the professional way to leave a job.

It should be said, though, that if an employer has a reputation for doing as the employer did in this case, there is more of a case to be made for just quitting without notice. By the same token, know that that employer can legitimately inform anyone who asks that you quit without giving notice, and it'll be up to you to counter that with the reason why. You'd either have to do so preemptively, or know that it was said and inject your defense at that time, or try to refute after-the-fact, but either way, you incur the significant risk of coming out looking bad even though you shouldn't. Life isn't always fair.

 

[Planogirl]

What gets me is that I've heard that a person can in some circumstances still be fired during that two week period and not always for cause. When I quit I want it on record that I quit not that I got fired. In the case I read about the former employee was able to draw unemployment though.

 

[bicker]

That would be fair: Leave on your own terms - no unemployment benefits. Leave on employer's terms - yes unemployment benefits.

 

[U2_rocks!]

I would have to give 3 months notice at my job, and I'd be paid for every day of that (plus more if I had accrued vacation). If I wanted to leave sooner, the company and I would have to come to an agreement about the handover of my work to my replacement. If I walked off the job before that notice period was up, they'd stop paying me of course, and they could come after me for breach of contract (though they probably wouldn't). However, my bridges would be burned there. If they wanted me gone sooner than the 3 months were up, they'd tell me so and write me a cheque for the balance of the notice period. I can't imagine how a company could send you home right away and not pay you! You are still technically employed until your official end date! No company where I live could get away with that!