While I doubt this actually happened, I'm still disturbed by everyone cheering it on absent any context that would make OP not look like a petulant child.
Quitting without notice doesn't require justification, fuck the bosses, whatever.
But for all we know, this manager had bent over backwards to stand up for their employees, or cover for them. Maybe this employee took advantage of that and was miserable to his coworkers. Those are just as likely as anything else, given that no further information was provided.
At least invent a backstory how this manager was dogshit or abusive, or the company was awful. Make us want to believe that you're not just someone with a persecution complex who's quick to anger and lash out.
I'd say the reply from the boss is enough to justify that response. The boss is chiding him for not putting in a 2 weeks notice, calling him unprofessional. From this one interaction you can make a pretty good assumption as to the quality of the boss. The only proper response to someone quitting is either a counter offer or a farewell, not a guilt trip.
Not really... It is unprofessional. That doesn't mean it's necessarily wrong, just that it's not always unreasonable for a manager to point that out. Again, we lack any other context for the situation.
I would add, that he also followed it up with a good luck and didn't drag it out. So, based off what limited evidence we have available, he seems like the more reasonable person in this situation.
Have you never had a good manager and a bad coworker?
When companies firing people for base reasons, i.e. reaching quarterly targets, is also universally seen as unprofessional and shunned as such, we can talk again. Until then, they deserve exactly as much courtesy as they are willing to give.
That's some pretty wild stuff you have to make up just because you have no good response. That's not even a straw man but a straw giant space monster. Sheesh dude ...
You can absolutely fire someone after they quit if notice is in your contract. Employee gives notice, doesn't show up for two weeks, and is fired with cause.
I don't know where you all work. But over here it is standard even for 'unqualified' work to have at least 1 month notice. For both sides. This gives employers and employees some time to find something new.
I'm speaking for the United States, minus Montana (if I recall correctly).
Neither employers nor employees are required to give notice. However, it is standard practice that employers do not give notice and employees do (usually two weeks).
When I worked at a callcenter they offered a new contract trading an agreement to give 2 weeks notice for a better paid vacation plan, with the consequence of failing to give notice being that the any unpaid pay periods would be paid at the minimum legal wage (which is of course a very pitiful wage I might add)
Fuckin managers will fire you with 0 notice, but that’s life and “at will employment”. You fire the business and you have to give 2 weeks because business run “lean” and “at will” is only supposed to be used by the business.
Well, there’s risk and reward in business, and more risk in running lean. Managers can always structure their departments to not be impacted by an inopportune departure. After all, people can get hit by a bus leaving their house in the morning.
Hell, if an employee is that critical, maybe they should be put under an employment contract with set terms and compensation agreement. You know, like most directors have.
A good rule of thumb is to never, ever burn bridges with past managers. Keep your dignity and remain professional. You never know when you'll need them as a reference.
In the US, that's straight up illegal unless they write you a reference separately. When the hiring company calls they can only give the legal answers.
Also, you could just write that letter yourself and have a friend be your ex boss. The rules are meaningless and the points are made up.
It is not illegal to call and talk about you with a reference that you gave them - that's the whole point of a reference. Separately, yes, calling a former boss may only get the prospective employer answers like "they worked here and are eligible for rehire", but that's usually a human resources policy to avoid a costly, but ultimately winnable if you only tell the truth, lawsuit. It's not illegal for a former boss to shit on you if you were shitty, and it happens all the time at smaller firms, in small industries, or small towns.
Why in the name of Murphy would you give them a bad reference?
This is explicitly an issue with employment verification and there are very clear legal boundaries there. Your revenge fantasy does not apply to reality.
Because you seem hellbent on finding a way around the law. HR departments don't do more than dates, rehire eligibility, and character of termination specifically because of legal liability.
So who am I going to believe, the guy saying you can shit talk whoever you want, or the professionals who do this every day in a legally safe manner?
A former manager of mine has been trying to convince me to return anytime she sees me since I left almost 2 years ago, offering me better pay and a position much higher on the foodchain. She also respects why I left (I had bigger ambitions that they couldn't meet at the time) and respects my reason that I haven't taken her up on that offer (that place only has really garbage benefits)
One of my wife's friends babysits for the director of IT at a large company 2 hours away and apparently I can get an interview with them if I just say the word.
Being professional and staying on good terms is not just for the employer, but it can also be a safety net to fall back on if things go sideways. Being able to reach out to contacts and say "Hey, I'm unexpectedly looking for a job now, do you have any openings?" is a very good place to be, plus sharing openings with former colleagues is a good way to help eachother out.
Dunno why you're getting blasted, you're right. What good is chastising the employee at that stage going to do if it isn't meant as a guilt trip? Does anyone really think the manager had his best interest in mind and is trying to look out for his future? Or is it more likely he is trying to keep shifts covered for 2 more weeks so productivity doesn't completely tank? I'd be completely okay with a simple "ok" or thumbs up emoji compared to a lecture.
Pretty much this. The manager, from one text, comes across as a holier than thou, "think of your coworkers!! We're family!!" Kind of person. One text can reveal that much. The "good luck" doesn't come across as sincere, since it follows that whining. Dude wants shifts covered for 2 weeks, he can hire someone else, do it himself , or fix whatever problems (probably money) made the person leave in the first place. Or they're a middle manager and get off on being overly focused on the "rules". Or he's just a low end shift manager, in which case why lick the boot that hard my dude?
It is sad this is the defacto situation now, but it shouldn't be that way. Managers should be there in interest of employees, to keep them on board, happy, and able to do their job efficiently... The company can't run without workers. Too many companies have forgotten that. A manager should be a buffer between the employees and the "corporate machine" (or better yet get rid of the corporate machine, but ya know...).
Maybe MY experience is limited, but what manager these days isn't pulling double duty? They do 3/4 of the job time with duties no different than the people under them, and also have to do all the managing part when possible. This is how it's been in the public service, retail, and customer service jobs I've worked.
Basically my experience. 90% of my job is unchanged, but I have to deal with extra emails and making sure there's toilet paper. Granted, I'd never bring up 2 week notices. Companies will not ensure that for workers, so workers should make fun of those companies for suggesting that. Hell, my mom's work asked if she'd give them 6 months noticed because they were understaffed and the other staff couldn't do their jobs and she laughed at her boss and told them they wouldn't do that for her.
They're saying that just because you claim something ought to be a certain way it has no bearing in how it is, or ever was.
This is a common thing done by libs to support capitalism. They talk about how it "ought" to work, as if there is any way for capitalism to exist that is not inherently anti-social. Its a defense used by the cynical and well meaning alike, a deflection to ignore the reality of how these hierarchical relationships were always designed to be. Its similar to how libs say its not capitalism its "crony capitalism"
What you're saying ought to be not only isn't, but never was. And talking about how it "ought to be" isn't a defense of reality
Ah, thanks for the explanation. I wasn't trying to defend anything, but I suppose I see how including the "now" in my original comment might be construed in a "things used to be better" way. Wasn't my intention, I have no idea how it used to be anyway.
Not going to edit the original though, for preservation of the context for this conversation.
Of course. Yeah i didn't think you meant it as a hard defense of anything. Your comment seemed totally well intentioned. And if capitalism was capable of good and not an inherently anti-social system then it ought to be like you're describing.
I think a lot of well intentioned people can get caught in that place of talking about how it ought to be instead of realizing why its not.
It's not licking boots to acknowledge that managers are people.
Every evil organization in history has had good people working for it. You hating them is yet another way the "above" people divide the "lower" people.
That being said, absolutely assume the manager is on the side of the company. This is a meme, we can't even prove if this shit is real. Fuck the company.
Pointing out the lack of context and the tantrum like behavior isn't nuance. The fact that you think otherwise makes me concerned for your ability to safely cross the street.
If you see this and your immediate reaction is to chastise some hypothetical tantrum then you might just be a bootlicker. At least own up to it instead of deflecting with arrogant ableism
Tantrum behavior like doing mass layoffs in response to a labor strike, a la UPS?
Of course. When workers stand up for their rational self interest, it's a tantrum. When bosses retaliate en masse against workers standing up for their rational self interest, that's just business 101.
Read your comment again, and then try and demonstrate the extrapolative capability of an adult crow, human child, or large language model. Go on, I believe in you.
Alright chucklefuck, pointing out that one whiney dick is throwing a tantrum has no logical bearing on the labor movement writ large, or my support of it.
Think a little slower, friend. Like you said, "hypothetical" boss - his whole point was that from the meme we don't actually know anything about the boss. You psychic?
Nah. Fuck em. If they were a decent manager they'd thank them for the notice they did get because they know that many managers punish people for giving notice.
All 2 years of it I see, my man you gotta open your eyes then. The amount of pettiness in that industry is insane. Your ignorance of it doesn't mean it doesn't exist
My man… just because you’ve seen it doesn’t mean everyone else has or that it’s common. Maybe you’ve just worked a shitty places. But that doesn’t mean it’s industry standard.
At least in the US, it seems pretty standard. Never worked retail myself, but everyone I know has hated it. Certainly a lot would like to imagine doing this kind of thing (but few actually would).
I can only say that my experiences in the field has been completely fine- and this includes working for Disney. And I can say that at 52 years old- I’ve been in the business for a long time. Never had a problem with anyone, and no one has had a problem with me.
If a person has a gripe with an entire industry- maybe the problem is with the person and not the industry.
How many Lemmy users do you think have never worked retail customer facing jobs, or food service? I'm betting it's a minority, but I could be wrong.
Either way, whatever internal compass you use to determine another user's job history needs some tuning because I've worked in plenty of service industry jobs.
Y'all are pretty tech savvy around here. I wouldn't be surprised at all to find out that the majority of Lemmy users skipped the retail/CS/hospitality jobs in favor of entry level IT/ tech jobs.
I'm guessing this has more to do with the US, than the particular profession.
I'm so used to workers rights, that getting a glimpse into how things are over there feels dystopian. Laws everyone would want, and benefitting everyone, except perhaps exploitative businesses, are "controversial".
It's very difficult to even fire someone here, and even if you did, 3 months to find something else is the norm. More often than not, you'd also be paid without doing much work during that time. If you resign, the company also has 3 months to figure something out.
Why... Would you not want that kind of predictability be the norm? It's not a net benefit to be able to resign or be fired on the spot. The only way that makes any sense is to just focus on one of the sides, at the convenient time. Bleh.
Setting aside hefty political corruption in the US, and media owned private interests that would make the Pinkertons shed a tear of joy... hm, and aside for a very peculiar election system that not only goes for the worst 2-party approach, but even has set it up in multiple ways in order to allow the minority of the two, to win.... ah... I see your point.
I'm curious about the relationship to managers in different industries. Fast food compared to programming. Warehouse/stacking managers have always treated the workers like idiots where I've been at. IT support depended on the company. Mail sorting was pretty chill as long as the work got done.
I'd be more inclined to see your point, except that the manager in question said "each job requires 2 weeks notice" like he was indignant that he didn't get something he deserved.
That's not only not true at all, it's active manipulation on their part in a hail Mary attempt to have their work covered for enough time to look for another employee.
It may be unprofessional to quit without notice, but it's really unprofessional to present the act of quitting as requiring 2 weeks' notice, particularly in a place that might also allow the employer to fire someone for any reason at any time with no notice.
it's really unprofessional to present the act of quitting as requiring 2 weeks' notice
If it's part of the contract then it's not unprofessional at all to bring up the terms that you've agreed on. My job requires a month's notice and it wouldn't be unprofessional for my employer to bring that up if I tried to quit on the spot.
That being said, I don't live in a place with "at-will employment", which is a fucking travesty and should never have been allowed in the first place.
It's not typically written into the contract for most jobs I've seen, but it's still considered very unprofessional to leave without giving the company time to find a replacement. It doesn't just mess with the company or your boss; it messes with your coworkers, too, who now have to pick up the slack.
Basically, while it's not written into your contract, it's still considered socially unacceptable not to give a two week notice barring any unusual circumstances.
It's always been in my contracts, a month's notice is the norm here. I've never broken that but I've also been fortunate enough to work at places where work and life are balanced. I wouldn't have wanted to disrupt the work for my colleagues and my managers have always shown their respect for me to the point that I want to work with them instead of against them. I don't think I'll ever work for an employer that puts the company over the wellbeing of their employees. I've seen what being a real team means. People cooperate freely and go the extra mile for eachother if necessary and cut massive amounts of slack to anybody in the team that's having a tough time and needs to focus on their life outside of work for a bit.
That said I won't ever get any bonuses or make large amounts of money in my career either but that's not what I'm after if it would mean putting work before life.
It's not unprofessional at all; at worst, it's discourteous, because notice of departure has zero to do with your professional conduct, it's a courtesy. You can professionally quit on the spot, look:
"Due to a change of personal circumstances, I will be resigning immediately, effective at the end of the day. I will work with you to make this transition as smooth as possible within that timeframe, but it is not negotiable."
I can understand going either way on that because they're semantically similar. However, I personally draw a distinction here because I'd much more readily accept being considered discourteous at work than unprofessional.
If it's considered 'unprofessional' then that is a raging misconception. At will contracts also mess wirh the company and your coworkers, demanding a courtesy you won't give your workers is horseshit.
Mine tend to ball out to a month's notice (on either side) for every year employed at the company....but i do business critical shit. I do not get the impression this is what is in the text conversation depicted.
Exactly this. If you don't want me to quit without notice, do you also vote against politicians who vote for "right-to-work" legislation?
Yeah, you don't get to write a fucking law that says you can fire me on the spot for any reason at all and then insist that I give you two weeks.
Besides, these days it's a different world - there's a labor shortage. A serious one. Warm body? You're hired. Nobody gives a fuck. They can't afford to. Especially in minimum wage.
Relatedly, my conspiracy theory is that the spate of recent layoffs are coordinated pushback against all the strikes and unionizing as well as pushback against RTO etc. Just a wild idea I had... May be total horseshit, idk.
On the other hand, we have seen collusion in the past within some sectors (e.g., price fixing, no poach agreements, wage fixing), and antitrust violations often go unpunished or weakly penalized, corporate leadership is strongly driven by profit often to the exclusion of ethics and at the expense of all else. And employee compensation is a significant part of most company budgets. So, I think my wild idea is at least somewhat plausible.
It's my fault. I finally got so fed up with blue collar stuff that I decided to start getting into the tech field, then pretty much immediately it all collapsed. Sorry for trying lol
As someone from IT, there isn't really a shortage. There are literal crowds of quite advanced developers searching for jobs. The only problem is that they don't have commercial experience and all companies only want seniors/teamleads/cto's with 10+ years of experience, to do at best middle-level developer's jobs. The shortage is artificial, but, I'm not complaining, as it's the only reason I get paid decent wage.
That’s not a wild conspiracy, that’s just how capitalism works? There is always collusion between capitalists to suppress labour power. Like we have repeated historical exemples of this. And yeah, through the same historical examples, get ready for the rise of fascism lol
I think the layoffs in IT are directly related to AI. I'm in IT and I have been for decades. With AI I can easily say my output has quadrupled. Maybe even more. But when everybody in your workforce can do the work of five people, you can wake up one day and realize your company is overwhelmed with redundancy.
This isn't going to remain limited to just IT and no, it's not just like the Industrial Revolution.
With my current workload I've found extremely limited opportunities for AI to help at all, but I'm certain that'll vary wildy by the individual job duties that fall onto a role
IT as a whole isn’t having a problem, just the developer segment of IT is getting canned because 7/10 people who went into “IT” in the past 20 years got pulled into development work and now there’s too many. IT is a huge sector, development is just a part of it, a part everyone went into because Silicon Valley was paying a ton of $ but not guaranteed stability
Oh that’s not true at with me. I’m mature enough to not make blanket statements or stereotypes such as that. But when I see kids sensationalizing shit, and manufacturing outrage for the sake of activism….. I call it out.
Then your next job calls this job to verify your employment, finds out you quit without notice, and withdraws the offer
Edit: I get that no one cares that what I'm saying is a real thing that happens in some companies. Just know that it is and tread carefully if you're thinking about quitting with no notice period
Edit: Also no, it is in no way illegal in the US for your previous employer to reveal a basic description of the terms of your separation to future/prospective employers
Lots of employers don't verify at all, especially for low level stuff.
Companies are also unlikely to provide much more than the start and end date of employment. No point taking any risks, no benefit from warning another company.
To each their own I guess...I work in healthcare and this is a very real thing that has negatively impacted people I've known who have quit without notice
Edit: Who is downvoting this one?! Fuck those hospital staff, I guess
Have you never had a job that didn't even go on your resume? I worked part time at a video store for some extra cash while I was waiting for a career position to start. I gave the heads up when I was leaving but if the manager had been a dickbag or something I would've fucked them over with no ragerts. We have zero context for this (probably fake) text.
I haven’t the slightest clue why people are mass downvoting your real experience here.
Because although the obsequious attitude he's advocating for might be individually advantageous, it's damaging to society (i.e. workers' power, collectively) and sure as fuck shouldn't be encouraged!
No, that's ridiculous. It's not damaging to anyone. It's the reality of the serious career world, and if you want a good career in reality (vs a worker's revolution or whatever in your fantasy) it would be wise to listen.
References are a real thing. Employment history is a real thing. These are checked by HR and hiring managers for serious career jobs, when an applicant is being considered. I have received direct confirmation of this from 2 jobs where I was hired, from my references and former employers who told me that the new employer called them to ask about me.
Original commenter who has been downvoted to hell here. I'vs spent half my life as a front-line worker and half my life in management, and in management I fight like hell for my people in the face of the greedy corporate bullshit we're handed down from on high.
That said, if you're going to be on my healthcare staff, I and all your colleagues need to be able to trust you. If you've demonstrated a pattern of quitting without notice, to me that demonstrates a lack of planning and/or frustration tolerance, and that makes me hesitant to trust you.
I get lots of people aren't working in jobs that aren't as high stakes as healthcare though
I live in Georgia USA my employment laws explicitly state I can be fired or quit for any reason or no reason. As much as that sucks, I could quit because I don't like my boss' new haircut and that's ironically more legally protected than me being fired for being bisexual.
Whether or not it's legal to quit or fire someone isn't the topic though, this is about your previous employer communicating your termination status to a prospective employer
they cannot ask why or how I left because the law is I can leave for any and no reason
Just because you can legally quit for any reason at any time does not mean your prospective employer can't ask your previous employer why or how you left. These are 2 different things
If they misrepresent the method of your termination in any way you can potentially sue for defamation, so, yeah, they can say what they want as long as they want to get sued.
Sure, but all your previous employer has to do is be honest. If you tell your boss you quit effective immediately, that's "resignation without notice" at most companies. You can try to sue for defamation if this costs you a future job, but your previous employer has their documentation lined up and you will lose
I'm a manager. No, I don't care. Agencies will because they want to see you a service. But even they don't go as far as more than 1. 2 references are rare.
I've dealt with plenty of applications and agencies. I don't think it's an insignificant sample size and experience.
I'm not talking about references though. I'm also a manager, I've done tons of references, and most are glowing. I'm talking about employment verification, which HR often handles totally separate from the hiring manager. Obviously this is going to vary based on organization and policy, and the entire concept seems deeply unpopular here lol
Employment verification isn't allowed to answer personal questions which would include the text above. HR contacts HR with the question, "Was this person employed on X through X dates." The reply is yes or no. The manager doesn't get involved.
Employment verification can absolutely include a description of the separation, eg "resignation with notice," "resignation without notice," or "terminated for cause." Lots of people saying this can't be said, but no one has cited any source because it's false
Your link isn't relevant because it is about being fired, not quitting.
But from your link:
"Many organizations have policies that limit their staff to providing only dates of employment and job titles when inquiries are made about past employees. Others may be more willing to share information with prospective employers."
So your statement only applies to your situation as your link confirms.
I hired people too. In only one situation where any ex employee was caught stealing from a client did I ever share anything negative. And that was only because the company who called was also a former customer.
I like how you end your post with an example of you doing the thing you're saying companies don't do lol
Of course this varies by organization and policy, but it's a real thing that many companies do. "Terminated with cause" aka fired is just one of several separation categories companies may share
I wasn't HR. It wasn't HR calling HR to verify employment. It was a former customer calling for a reference. So yes it can happen that if that OP used the company as a reference, the former manager could take the call and say, "He quit without 2 weeks notice." It isn't standard as your own link confirmed. But that's not hr verifying employment.
"Terminated with cause”
This wasn't terminated with cause, fired or anything like that. The post is about an employee who quit. They are allowed to quit.
I don't know what you're arguing against here, my entire point is that there are some companies that communicate separation status by policy, whether that's "terminated for cause," "resigned without notice," or "resigned with notice," and that "resigned without notice" can negatively impact job opportunities at some companies.
If someone tries to verify employment at my previous job, they will be directed to https://theworknumber.com/, which a metric fuckton of businesses use. When they access the information on that site, they will find my company's HR department has uploaded the name, dates of employment, and reason for separation. I don't understand why you think I'm somehow a proponent or advocate of this, I'm literally just communicating that it exists and is real
Regarding not sharing your previous employer, you're welcome to choose to lie on your resume, but I'm not going to
Except that's not how this works if you were ever in a position to actually verify employment. Every company ever will specifically tell their employees to just confirm whether or not the person used to work there and that's it.
Anything else opens the company up to a lawsuit for slander. The employee is already gone. No company is going to risk a lawsuit just to warn another company of a bad employee.
The large hospital system I used to work for absolutely communicates termination status to other employers, one of those is "resignation without notice," and I knew 2 people who had job offers rescinded other places after verification
It seems like this greatly depends on your manager, rather than a company. Some will try to offer other positions in the company which will count as a layoff for the tops, it seems, but a worker will still be there, some will tell you in the last minute
Get the best sounding friend you know and let them know what you're doing. Say you did landscaping or wallpaper work for someone and give them that friends number doesn't even have to be their real name you give them and boom, you just verified your work history. Obviously depends on what you are applying for you could say computer work or a number of many other things. If you do work like that for someone you're private contracted so they have no way to prove that you didn't do it
Thank you for attempting to bring facts to what looks to be a feelings party - people could literally end up homeless by following this pattern, e.g. if the new job fell through and the one after that checks both previous references, then all the old manager has to do is send that screenshot.
Karma exists, and yes corporations are evil SOBs but that's no reason for us to be so likewise.
And ofc it's a joke meme, but... is it tho? And anyway why downvote you even so? Now I too will accept those alongside you, and I suggest we treat it as a badge of honor at this point, I will hold fast to what is true regardless.
In the United States, that would be illegal. The only information that a company is allowed to give is whether a person is employed or not. Anything else will open them up to legal troubles. So you're right that this conversation could take place, but it wouldn't, and if it did, the former employee can make bank in court for damages.
E: turns out I was mistaken on this as it's what I've been told many times over. However, on a state to state basis, and specifically in my state, information shared is restricted to being work related. I think a nasty text isn't work related, but it could be said that there wasn't a notice given. IANAL, so ignore everything I wrote and don't spread as fact. Be better than me.
They can make bank if they knew. The company can just take back their offer for any reason and they don't have to tell the incoming employee why they did that. You think an HR is going to tell you that they talked to your last employer? No
Former employers can answer a narrow set of questions without opening themselves up to liability. Among them:
dates of employment
documented departure reason
eligible for rehire
status of non-competes
I'm guessing somewhere between the departure reason and "no, we wouldn't rehire this person" the new employer might have some additional questions for the prospective employee.
Some companies deserve to have you quit without notice, fuck 'em, but they are allowed to report some facts to other HR departments who ask.
I'm straight up about to go in and out my employer on notice. Been 9 years, I've had enough. I'm not trying to screw them, so I'm going to give them an opportunity to hire replacements for me before I go. The ball will be in their court.
This was mostly in response to your last paragraph. Not really related, but it feels good to more or less say it out loud.
Giving at least a few days notice is helpful, nobody ever expects you to do anything during that time, they might just send you home or ask you to document and close out your current projects.
After 9 years, what's one of two weeks to avoid souring a potential reference? It feels just as good clocking out that last time as quitting on the spot.
Usually you get "is there anything we can do to keep you", "is there any reason you're quitting" and "when is your last day".
Edit: by souring I mean most employers won't outright badmouth you, but your boss might say good things about you even though you've quit. If there's a chance of that then that is valuable when you negotiate your next job.
I didn't quit, I told them my time here is short and they should figure out my replacements. I don't have a firm timeline, because I'm not sure how my product will play out, but I will be leaving and I will help with the transition. If my opportunity turns into a reality, I will give them a hard date. Also, I'm the only person that does a lot of stuff here, and I know they will hurt without me, so I'm not gonna turn off my phone when I leave and leave them high and dry. If this place treated me really poorly, I'd have no qualms about walking out now, but they didn't, so I'm not.
I mean it's also illegal to get fired for discussing wages with coworkers, but then you get "fired for poor performance/attitude." They don't have to say they did anything wrong. Same here, 2 managers "talking" aren't going to go out of their way to try to get the other in trouble. They'll be happy for the info and not say anything.
A good boss knows that this will impact the rest of the team, and in many cases require discussions about covering shifts, rehiring new people and rebuilding relationships.
You can also be right without being an asshole, but unfortunately you can't seem to vote for any decent right wing party that isn't packaged with bigotry these days.
Ive bought a 'sorry for your loss' greeting card and write 'I quit ' on the inside and hand it to my superior before leaving when they asked for my notice in writing. I already had another job, I didn't need a reference and if I did I'd just have a friend lie for me. Fuck the bosses.
They just need that for their records, so next time you should get one of those giant office sized birthday or sympathy cards which won't fit in any standard drawers. They can still scan it but it's annoying.
If you're feeling especially grumpy, sign a bristol board with 3" tall letters, or novelty cheque sized document (you can spend $2 for the bristol board, or like $50 on novelty stationary).
If it's cardboard or paper, they could just fold it. Use something they can't fold, like acrylic sheet or super brittle paper-like that would crumble or break if folded.
In the US there is no notice period for firing in "at-will" states (which is all except Montana). It goes both directions though, there is no notice period when quitting. So chances are, if the OP is in the US, the boss was full of it.
Well, they can but that particular employment method was abolished in the US (though not made illegal, which is an interesting distinction that definitely hasn't ever been abused before) with an obvious (to the people who made it) exception for prisoners.
Eh, if you're really done and just refuse to do anything they say, they'll have you discharged inside a month. The couple times I saw it happen it actually looked like a relief on both sides. Nobody bothered the guy leaving anymore, and he would willingly do office chores again for the last 3 or 4 weeks.
Of course you don't get all of your benefits, you can never come back, and the re-enlistment codes are regularly leaked so any HR will know how you left the second they see your discharge form.
When it gets nasty and takes months is when the leadership wants someone gone and the soldier insists on trying to to stay.
Depends on the country. Here in the Netherlands you usually have a 1 month notice period. This is the default, you can put a different notice period in the employment contract but it’s not common. Regardless, the notice period for the employer is always double that of the employee.
2 weeks notice is a pretty much universal standard when quitting. Layoffs usually gives with severance pay, so unless you pay severance to the employer when quitting, giving a courtesy of possible doesn't seem like a lot to ask.
But severance pay is almost always part of consideration in a "you can't sue us" contract. So the company is not just giving you pay in lieu of notice, they're buying your rights away.
I've also seen plenty of corporations that punish you when you give two weeks notice by immediately barring you from working and you end up losing two weeks pay by planning on being considerate.
Honestly if you’re the one person maintaining a system you don’t even have to sabotage, just the act of leaving itself is sabotage, and that you most definitely cannot be sued for
We can fire you and sever you from your livelihood at any time, for any or no reason, with zero notice. You must give us two weeks notice to find your replacement before even slightly impacting our bottom line. Repat after me: we are a family.
lmao, but also maybe I've been lucky but I've never had a boss so bad I would do this to 'em. All of my job exits have been amicable and known about well in advance of my last day sans-shrug
I booked a vacation and took a photo of the schedule before leaving. During my vacation I got a call that I wasn't at my shift. They had changed the schedule while I was gone and after it was originally posted. I hated that job, so when they threatened to write me up I said I wasn't coming back.
That place had horrible management, horrible employee retention, and yelled at employees regularly.
We need to push for more protections like required notice and/or undermine at-will employment in various ways. I'm sick of corps having us over a barrel in every way.
I live in the Netherlands which has much stronger workplace protections than USA (which I'm assuming this image is from). It's still normal and maybe required to give notice, usually 30 days, but they also can't fire you without cause and severance.
Notices are logical from a business perspective, they just should be extended both ways.
I also live in the Netherlands, and because I have worked at my current job quite long already, they have a notice-period of 4 months when they want to fire me, and I have 1 month notice-period when I want to quit.
To be really honest, that is almost absurd for the employer.
That sounds very much like something that the Netherlands might be interested in. If you are a “highly qualified foreigner” (Master-degree counts) you may even see very substantial tax-benefits being given to you by the government (for the first five years 30% of your income won’t be taxed).
(German citizen living in the Netherlands for work.)
I keep saying we want to be careful of that, though. At-will employment also means you are free to leave whenever. If you had to give a month's notice to some of these toxic AF work-places, it could feel like torture. Imagine if you're being personally harassed or bullied already, and now they have you over a barrel for another month. No, thank you. Imperfect though it may be, it's better for us in the long run, at least in the current climate.
Years ago I received a promotion after just a month of starting and one dude started spreading rumors about me to get me fired, claiming he was more deserving of the position since he had been there longer. But he was only there because they were so short staffed that even someone such as himself who'd do a day's worth of work over the course of a week couldn't be fired without screwing up everybody else's schedules. I referred some friends and once they were hired he was out the door. Hit me up on LinkedIn about a month later asking for a reference. There are some serious clowns out there.
The only reason to give notice is if there are benefits to giving notice, like having banked PTO paid out or something (if you’re in a state where it’s not required to be paid out). Otherwise, absolutely call the morning of and let them know you quit.
That may not be the best advice. Depends on your industry, but burning a bridge so quickly may hurt you in the future. I’ve had former coworkers and other managers help me get my foot in the door for another job.
Besides, there’s something cathartic about knowing the end is right there and still getting paid for it.
Yea, I should have been explicit for the caveat being that it’s not a job you need as a reference or anything. If you’re in retail, they don’t give a shit about past jobs, just that you’re a body now. If your current retail gig is toxic, that’s when to pull this shit out.
Sure, but that's on a case basis. If it makes sense then do that. But all these people in here saying you can't do it because it's unprofessional are ridiculous. Was it unprofessional for the boss to just schedule someone for zero hours?
Depending on the job, that can be pretty fucked up for the people you work with. Your co-workers often deserve some consideration too. If you're doing something that doesn't require knowledge transfer, then whatever, but if you have specific and complex knowledge of systems that you need to transfer to other people who will be responsible for maintaining them in your absence, it's pretty messed up to just dump that shit in their lap.
It lets them negotiate rules about not firing people without notice, and is otherwise highly correlated with being the kind of place people don't want to quit without notice.
It also gives them power to be able to make other demands, such as (for example) being given enough time to properly document processes and get cross-training and such.
That is just a sign of poor management in general. If an employee quitting causes that much disruption, there is usual a direct correlation with poor practices.
