Slashdot Mirror
Can You Be Sued for Quitting?
An anonymous reader asks: "I work at a large hosting company in Texas, and recently decided to go work for a smaller competitor. I had a great relationship with my employer and wanted to leave on good terms, and I hadn't signed any non-compete or employment agreements . I felt my old company had just gotten too large and I didn't like working there anymore, so I gave them two weeks notice in writing. They were really upset when I insisted on leaving and one week into my last two weeks the V.P. of Sales told me the company was suing me for leaving, and they were also suing my new employer for hiring me. I was shocked, and they then escorted me out of the building. Has anybody ever heard of this happening? Do they have any legal basis for suing me?" It shouldn't have to be said that seeking professional legal representation, in such a situation, is the first thing one should do.
But without a non-competition agreement I can't see that theirs would go very far. Of course anyone can sue anybody at anytime for anything. Actually winning a judgement is another matter.
Perhaps your former employer might be better advised to spend the money and effort having a consultant come in and find out why they are losing people - a professional job satisfaction survey, say. If you have found that the work environment has changed enough to motivate you to seek employment elsewhere, then others are likely thinking the same thing. Maybe their threat of a lawsuit is a form of coercive message to other workers that they had better stay... or else!!
I'd strongly suggest you go over any paperwork that you might have, and make sure that you didn't inadvertently, through lack of knowledge, sign something that can be construed as a non-compete, or other type of non-disclosure agreement. As the old saying goes, cover your butt with paper.
Good luck on this.
Ignorance is blissful, to the ignorant.
There are no rules about giving them sufficient notice, that is bunk. I dont give notice when I quit because if I was fired my employer wouldnt give me two weeks notice that I was out of a job in two weeks. Its really not conducive to good office policy to give two weeks notice because it almost always leads to you being where youre not wanted for those two weeks. They dont trust you during those two weeks and youre just asking for a hard time. Just stop showing up, that's how to quit. Ive done this several times and still get good references.
In America you can sue anyone for anything.
Its a pain in the ass, it'll cost you some money, but they don't have a case so don't let it stress you out. The new company will need to deal with the suit on their end, the likelihood is their attorney can handle your suit as well.
Its happened to me twice, I think the total it cost me in legal expenses was $500 and a few hours to show up in court.
You may have good luck counter suing. Blog about it, too. Make sure potential customers of theirs know how they treat their employees.
The important thing is to not let it stress you out.
If they gave you no explanation then they're full of hot air! They're only attempting to discourage you from sharing your knowledge with the smaller competitor. If your future employer refuses to offer you employment due to a possible lawsuit them you may have a VERY big check coming your way if you counter-sue your former employer for defamation and damages.
I used to work for a Fortune 500 company a few years back that attempted the exact same stunt to a coworker that quit, they were hoping to scare him accepting employment from a much smaller consulting company which happened to compete with them. In the end, the big Fortune 500 employer never sued, but the ex-coworker sued them for defamation and won a real nice 6 figures out of those a$$holes.
1. In the U.S., two-weeks is the customary length of notice for non-contract employees. A common phrase is, "They can't fault you, you gave them your two-weeks." Of course there are exceptions for people who are extremely unique in their position, but two-weeks is the customary time frame, and employers must pay you for those two full-weeks even if they choose to not let you stay after you give your notice.
2. I believe in the Google issue there was actually a contract saying one could not go work for a competitor, or start your own company in the same field (or some variation of such). Those are pretty common, but has nothing to do with two-weeks notice but what you do after you leave the company. These don't always hold up well - especially if the person didn't have any proprietary knowledge that will benefit the other company.
3. To the OP, all I can say is your company already screwed up by threatening a lawsuit. Unless there is some big info being left out, of course, they cannot sue you for quitting your job, UNLESS you signed a no-compete contract. The VP tells you this? There is some shady stuff right there - no one but HR should even discuss such things.
Sounds like you are getting out just in time. Again, if the situation is as described, I don't think there is anything to worry about - sounds like a couple of people who don't know what their legal rights are and aren't were trying to scare you. Now you just need to decide - do you just wash your hands of the place, or make sure that the jerks who tried to pull this crap on you are known for what they are.
I just have a feeling, though, that SOMETHING isn't being fully disclosed here.
AE
At my old company I gave them two weeks notice and then served as a contract employee for around four months just to help them close out the projects I was working on. I think anything else would have been kind of ass-ish of me. My goal is to avoid losing money for my employer, though it's not the primary goal. If they haven't been asses to you, don't be an ass to them. It's almost like it's as simple as living life.
-knewter
That seems ridiculous. Of course without any evidence to back this story up, Slashdot could probably now be sued by ThePlanet for libel.
My wife had a former employer threaten to sue her if she took a local job in her industry. She went to a lawyer, and showed him the letter. The lawyer basically laughed at it, sent his own letter back and that was that.
Having said the above, not all lawyers are created equal. Get one who knows what he's doing about employment law. Our local bar association has a lawyer referral service and will give you the names of lawyers with the correct specialization. Call your local bar association and see if they have a similar service.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
I guess he's in the USA. Diferent countries, diferent laws, even inside the EU. In Spain, for example, the notice needs not be sooner than 15 (working) days before. Anything more and your are being generous. For leaving in good terms I'd say one or two months. With that they should have plenty of time to start to search your replacement.
As the CP says, two weeks is the norm in the US, and even that is only a matter of tradition and courtesy, not a matter of law. If you decide one day to quit your job, you can just say "I quit" and walk out and that's that.
Microsoft did sue Google, but they settled out of court, and Lee works for Google today.
Even if the guy being sued did sign a non-compete without realizing, they still can only sue to block him from working for a competitor. They can't sue him just for quitting. And depending on what Texas courts think of non-competes, they might still be on thin ice. Here in California, courts have generally held non-competes to unenforceable. I have a non-compete, like most other tech workers, and the major reason courts have generally held them unenforceable is that (especially in a narrow specialty like mine), a two-year non-compete clause would be tantamount to forcing me to leave my chosen career completely and work for a lot less money in some other industry.
Add to that the fact that the standard employment agreement states that you have an at-will relationship with your employer. They can terminate your employment at any time, for any reason, or for none. Likewise, you can quit at any time, for any reason, or for none. If an employee is going to be at-will (yes, you can still sue for wrongful termination in some circumstances, I know), companies can't expect to have it both ways. If they can do whatever they want with respect to their employees' employment, employees likewise should be able to do so.
I agree with that idea, both because I'm an employee, and because I have fairly libertarian principles regarding the free market for goods and services. My job skills, like my house, stocks, car, or any other assets, should be worth whatever the market will bear, to offer to any bidder, without restriction. If a company can keeps its employees happy (and that takes a lot more than salary; salary may not even be the top thing; I'd rather make a medium salary at a great place to work than a top-of-market salary at a bad place to work), they'll stay there and work. If it can't, they'll go elsewhere. Maybe to a competitor. That's fair. Employees should have the same relationship with a company that customers do: make them unhappy and you'll lose them.
Generally speaking, you should always try to have a written contract of employment so you know where you stand with regards your employment. Just because you didn't sign anything doesn't mean there are no terms under which you are employed - it is just that they have not been reduced to a written form.
If you were in a particularly senior position and/or handled sensitive information as part of your job, then it is likely that there would some form of non-compete in place. If you are able to, check your staff handbook (if any) and try to obtain a copy of a contract of employment from a friend at your old workplace to see if there is any mention of a non-compete clause. If there is, then it makes your position weaker unfortunately.
IAAL and I think the only people that ever win in court are the lawyers. It is in everyone's interests to avoid going to court if at all possible as it will be a waste of time, money and effort.
Perhaps you could try writing to the employer? Explain reasons for leaving, that you want to leave on good terms, wish them well etc. Say you were disappointed to hear that they are considering taking action against you and would like them to explain the basis for doing so.
Worse case scenario is that they go ahead. Best case, you find out that they were never consider taking action in the first place or they realise they are being silly and move on.
(Standard disclaimer: Whilst IAAL this should not be considered legal advice. See a local lawyer if you feel the situation warrants it).
You can't.
So maybe the "Large Hosting Company" should have been left anonymous.
They can fire you for any reason execpt race,relgion,etc. In other words you are out of luck, just take the week with a smile; or since they fired you go file for unemployment.
However you could possibly sue them if they broke the employee handbook, that is generally considered a contract and breaking that has lead to million dollar lawsuits. However most companies settle out of court because of the bad press relations with future employees; how would you feel if when researching a company you find a message about that company firing people when they have given thier leave notice? When companies don't want soon to be former employees hanging around they normally just pay them the money for the remaining weeks and escort them out the door.
As for the lawsuit, time to hire a lawyer. Unless you were some grand person in thier company they probably don't have much of a recourse. You should get a lawyer and see if in Texas you can sue the other company for preventing you from performing in another job and see if filing for unemployment will hurt your case(it may strengthen it since confirms with an outside source that they fired you).
Now that's the idea.
...
I propose the poor guy sues his company. before it has time to sue him.
IANAL, but I'm sure a pro can find a few nicely worded offenses commited by this company (Breaking the freedom of choosing its employer, being considered as a serf belonging to the company while slavery has been abolished for some time, moral prejudice for unneeded sufferings, cruelty (in group), libel (?), being an asshole (NOT A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT, even if 2 centuries of practice make most american think it is), intimidation, unheeded meddling in someone's affairs, etc
Anyhow, if they want to play dumb, he should just play harder...
It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
C - the footgun of programming languages
According to California labor law (IANAL too) 72 hours notice is all an ordinary employee without a contract needs give an employer before leaving. The ONLY penalty for not giving even this amount of notice is one might lose accrued vacation time.
72 hours. That's all. Just enough time so you can't quit on a Friday after work and never show up again.
Check your local laws, but I'll bet it's similar anywhere in the US of A.
With respect to the Google case, there was a non-compete clause in the worker's contract, IIRC.
You need to keep a shit list. I've been with one company for about 12 years now. For the last 5, I've kept an offline diary about my work there. Every time I think I was wronged, I write about it while it's still fresh in my mind. Every time I do something really good, I write in another diary.
For your own sake, keep these private. Fireproof box with a combo or a key you *always* keep with you is okay.
When something goes bad for you, decide how you want to treat it. Do you want to pull out something from the "good book" or from the "bad book".
If you get threatened, you can easily turn the log over to a lawyer for a quick browse. Something as simple of 15~20 minutes of overtime (why does the boss call at 4:58PM for a chat about an e-mail I sent at 9AM) every week over a few years can leave a company with massive fines. Every racist/sexist joke you hear is handy too.
Even if nothing ever goes wrong, maybe one of those jackasses will run for office one day. Then, you can call them up and ask them if they remember the time they did Stacy while she was passed out after the office party. Maybe get a nice retirement bonus out of it. Or you could just end up dead like one former President's old buddies. Hmm...
I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
Stories like this makes me happy to live in a country where unions are the norm. The union would handle this case, and I wouldn't have to worry about it.
[ Most of the employers are actually happy with the unions as well, the unions tend to prevent strikes and make the salaries fluctuate less, which makes long time planning easier. ]
IANAL, so get one.
Employment laws can vary state to state.
This has to be the worst Ask Slashdot ever.
JUDGE: How does the defendant plead?
AC: A couple of guys from Slashdot said they don't have a case, so why do I have to plead?
JUDGE stares in disbelief while shaking his head and mumbling "It's going to be one of those days"
If you are fired, you are not entitled to severence, and if you went to apply for unemployment, they can contest it. However, in this case, it appears he has a wrongful termination suit he could file. Getting fired after giving your 2 weeks notice, if you did nothing wrong, is illegal. That being said, a company can always find some reason to terminate the employment agreement, but you usually end up with severance at that point.
I came, I conquered, I coredumped
"Frist Ojbection, yer honner!"
rewriting history since 2109
This is an international forum, being used to discuss a state-specific legal issue. People from all over the world, and from all different states will discuss what the "law" is without realizing that they may not be discussing the same thing. Thankfully, this post had the decency to mention the jurisdiction, but what percentage of the people reading *and posting responses* are from Texas?!?
Next, this post would be 100x more interesting if we learned the outcome of the situation. So what if somebody's ex-employer was a dick and said some shit about suing? Like that won't happen again. If this individual was telling us about an actual outcome based on real law, then this might actually be worth reading about.
Finally, the "editor" should be fired *and* sued for posting this kind of clueless "get a frickin' lawyer when and if it happens" crap.
-- http://thegirlorthecar.com funny dating game for guys
There is also the possibility that he lives in an 'At Will' state, with a company that has a 'At Will' working agreement. In both cases without notice you can be terminated for anything or even nothing. This is supposed to be useful for an employee (so you can leave employment at any time without needing to give prior notice), but mostly is just a big axe over your head for whatever company you work for...
My state and employer are both that way, so I'm quite aware of how that works...
Now the problem if he is in such a situation... Is that he won't be able to counter sue for wrongful termination (it doesn't exist in states like that).
we are all invisible unless we choose otherwise
In my case, the company I was working for had difficulty paying with checks that didn't bounce. Eventually a couple of us got together with another party to form another business. Somehow they discovered this plan, fired us and threatened the other party with a lawsuit and they wouldn't return our calls.
Texas is an at-will employment state. It allows either party to terminate employment for any reason or none at all. Employment agreements and non-competes still exist, however, and are often one-sided so one should be careful about working for people like that. (I once got a job offer from just such a company and their non-compete and other employee policies just made me feel creepy so I turned them down flat.)
The lawsuit is most likely an attempt at preventing him from being hired at a competitor's site. If the poster is truthful about the conditions stated, the employer's suit doesn't have merit and is merely a form of intimidation. This leads back to the other concensus which is the management at the bigger company is just not good. "Executive Hubris" is a term used is a previous Slashdot discussion and perhaps this is yet another example of such. I should hope that other employees at the bigger company are taking note of management's attitude...
Blödsinn. (Bullshit, for our English readers.)
In Germany, the standard is four weeks to the end of the month or the 15th of the month, unless your contract states something else. If I were offered a contract telling me I had to wait three months until I can walk away, I'd ask them to have their heads examined. Also, companies want to get rid of people *quicker*, that's why there is so much discussion in Germany about changing the work laws to allow companies to fire people with no delay whatsoever.
Notice there's a difference in whether you're quitting or you're fired. You can always quit with four weeks notice, but if they want to fire you, it depends on how long you work at the place. A coworker has been fired after 11 years at the company and they had to give her four months notice.
There go my mod points, but this was SO wrong I had to jump in.
As a side note - I've got so much overtime and vacation left that when I find a new job, I can leave the same minute and they still have to pay me for eight weeks. (Of course I will offer to freelance at a fair rate to not endanger my projects, but that's only because I don't want to leave my coworkers stuck in the shit.) So there are your "three months notice".
Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard disk?
My understanding is that we all had a little brawl back in the 1860's which was based, in part, as to whether one man could FORCE another to work for him.
The result, I believe, was a rather empathic NO!
Am I the only one who thinks there has to be more to the story? I know there are a lot of silly lawsuits out there, but c'mon...
Since the company escorted him out of the building they are not trying to leverage him to stay, so they must be trying to recover some damages. I'm not saying the company is right, I'm just saying that a large company with a legal department wouldn't waste their money on a lawsuit unless they had at least a CHANCE to get some money.
For example.......
Did he recently get a promotion that included relocation, which carried with it a minumum commitment? Something else? What's the rest of the story OP?
Am I the only one that finds it a LITTLE suspicious that this article links to two wikipedia articles, the "evil" hosting company, and is posted by an AC? Can we say smear campaign or disgruntle employee? People, this is a completely transparent ploy to smear the poor bastards who are being accused. It is a travesty that this crap was even posted in the first place. It would have been one thing if the hosting company hand not been named, or if the accuser had named themselves. The fact that only the 'evil' hosting company in question is named and there is absolutely zero evidence that they did anything wrong, not even an angry blog, should be causing all of your bullshit detectors to go off.
Personally, I am deeply disappointed that this blatant smear was even posted in the first place.
I dont give notice when I quit because if I was fired my employer wouldnt give me two weeks notice that I was out of a job in two weeks.
I had that discussion with one of my managers about people giving notice, and I asked him how much notice I would get from him if I were to be fired or laid off. He went into a long explanation of how telling an employee he's getting canned causes all sorts of security problems and low productivity etc etc, to which I pointed out I would give him as much notice as I thought he would give me.
I don't think he liked that, but he understood where I was coming from. Companies expect generosity and loyalty from their employees, but have absolutely no intention of being generous or loyal to their employees. Generous and loyal employees increase company proffit. Generous and loyal companies lower company proffit. That can only lead to this sort of behavior.
I hope this fellow gets a nice settlement from a countersuit, he deserves it.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
If you say so, man.
I always try to leave a place on a somewhat positive note, not bitching and moaning the whole way out. I don't tend to join places where they're completely incompetent or assholes, so I show the colleagues I leave behind the respect that I think they deserve.
What goes around comes around, too. I've never had someone just walk out on me and leave their projects hanging. People who work for me and feel they need to go work elsewhere almost universally have done so without just ditching me. They usually give me a couple weeks to a month.
Treat people with respect and you tend to get respect. Treat people like shit and they tend to treat you like shit.
Why are you letting these clowns ruin our country?
AC's Work History:
Wendy's
Taco Bell
KFC
McDonalds
Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
"Where's my "funny" mod points when I need them?"
Better still, where's the "ironic" mod points? Aside from that, this is terrible advice. Why burn your bridges? Put in your two weeks notice, then during that time do your best for your current employer. That way if your current job does not work out, or you find yourself desiring to return, it would make it much easier for you, as your employer will remember what you did for them in your final days.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
In Ontario, where I live, the law is that your employer must give you two weeks notice, or two weeks pay in lieu of notice when firing you without cause. Case law says they have to give you more than 2 weeks if you have been working for some certain amount of time. If there is cause for dismissal, they don't have to give you notice. On the other hand, when you leave your employer, you don't have to give them any notice. They also in return, don't have to give you a good reference. I'm not sure how contracts and all that other stuff fits in, but unless they have it in writing that you can't leave without X amount of notice, then you can leave whenever you please.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
>I guess he's in the USA
I didn't have to guess. Texas is a dead giveaway...
I had that discussion with one of my managers about people giving notice, and I asked him how much notice I would get from him if I were to be fired or laid off. He went into a long explanation of how telling an employee he's getting canned causes all sorts of security problems and low productivity etc etc, to which I pointed out I would give him as much notice as I thought he would give me. I don't think he liked that, but he understood where I was coming from. Companies expect generosity and loyalty from their employees, but have absolutely no intention of being generous or loyal to their employees. Generous and loyal employees increase company proffit. Generous and loyal companies lower company proffit. That can only lead to this sort of behavior.
A decent company will solve that dilemma by giving you a decent severance package. This is especially true if you're simply laid off as opposed to being fired for Xeroxing your ass.
No, your goal is to not lose money from your employer while they are still your employer. :)
Being a professional and finishing up your projects is a good way to encourage goodwill should you choose to come back, and also to get good references.
I've been struggling to find ways to be effective where I currently work and, in an effort to do so, I've struck up relationships with people who seem to be doing well and started keeping a journal of observations. The only rule is "be honest, but don't whine".
It's been helpful, mostly because it has enabled me to thread together events in time that I might not have otherwise seen if I wasn't keeping track. My effectiveness has been improving...but it is also becoming more and more apparant that this is one of the most disfuntional organization I've ever worked for.
On the plus side, I've picked up some useful skills on how to function in a dis-organized environment and learned some new FEA software along the way. All very useful things to bring to my next gig.
Keeping an objective journal (not a "shit-list") is a good idea.
A goal is a dream with a deadline
They were really upset when I insisted on leaving and one week into my last two weeks the V.P. of Sales told me the company was suing me for leaving, and they were also suing my new employer for hiring me. I was shocked, and they then escorted me out of the building.
IANAL, but the way I see it, and consult your lawyer about this, you were still employed with your old company when they escorted you out the door one week before you planned to leave. Did they pay you for that last week? If not, they terminated your employment, not you. Because of this, you have a right to gainful employment anywhere, including the competition. Because you say you didn't sign a non-compete agreement, this "non-payment" of your proposed final week can only help you in court. (I say "proposed" because you could have always changed your mind and continued working there as per their request.)
Texas is a right-to-work state, theres very little ground they have in suing you. Even if you had a non-compete disclosure. It's ahrd to up hold in a court of law.
I had that discussion with one of my managers about people giving notice, and I asked him how much notice I would get from him if I were to be fired or laid off.
For security purposes, I understand why a company would not want to give you notice of a lay off and instead say thanks for your service. However, a reputable company would give you at least two weeks severance pay... which is kind of like a two weeks notice, but better: You don't have to work for the company, they are paying you not to work, and you have two weeks (or more) pay to hunt down a new job.
It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.
Where I work we are required to give three months notice.
This leads to what I like to refer to as the 'abusive relationship situation'. This is where once an employee gives notice their life is made HELL until they are out. The abuse comes from peers and all levels of management. Peers think you are a traitor for leaving them with the workload and having to train up someone new, and management resent you for leaving, prolly 'cos they never had the guts to.
The situation is so bad that some employee's accumulate as much PTO (Paid time off) as they can, so they can submit their resignation and be on PTO up to their terminal date.
It is really sad that we don't celebrate our colleagues perusing their ventures, like we should.
If you are working in Texas, you the priviledge in that Texas is a "employment at will"(PDF) state. The implications are that you can work, or not work, when you want to. That doesn't mean your boss has to keep your employed, but it means they can't stop you from leaving either (and unions can't stop you from working, too).
From the PDF link above:
(emphasis mine)
If I were you, I would have your lawyer look into whether this company has a history of such litigation. If so, I would have your lawyer counter sue, for a lot of money, for legal harassment. This is in light of the "employment at will" and previous behavior.
Frankly, if someone gives notice, you want them gone as soon as is possible. They've cut the relationship, and your work is no longer their top priority.
And frankly, even from a moral point of view do you want someone walking around talking about how much better a job they are moving too?
A policy that requires people to stay 3 months is idiotic and self-defeating. Granted their may be extenuating circumstances (hard to fill position, very arcane knowledge, etc) but a blanket rule like that isn't a great idea.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
Hell, I'm an attorney and I would love to get this case (too bad it's in a different state). What this sounds like is a bunch of legally clueless management types got mad, and decided to take it out on this guy, using a court system they're ignorant about.
If I were his lawyer I'd countersue for malicious prosecution, tortious interference with business relationship, and hell maybe intentional infliction of emotional distress depending on the facts of the case. A lot of states also have attorneys' fees statutes for frivolous actions, so I'd ask for attorneys' fees too.
Unfortunately the company would probably fold after one letter to their corporate counsel, so whatever lawyer this guy gets likely wouldn't get the pleasure of bringing this to trial.
IANAL either, but this guy is (in Texas): http://www.brownemploymentlaw.com/non_competition. shtml
But, by firing you a week early, they've fired you. In Kansas, the state in which I've been fired a couple of times, I can tell you that you should at least file a claim with the unemployment office so that their unemployment insurance rates will go up.
And as for the two weeks notice ... it depends on the company you work for as to wether that was a good thing. As an employer, I certainly appreciate the notice and always have amicable relations with employees who are leaving. As an employee, I've never felt compelled to commit sabotage after giving my notice.
When I left my first real job, after six and a half years there I gave them four months notice. I wasn't sure where I was going or what I was going to do, but I knew I was leaving. So I told them. About two months short of that, I decided to start my own business in direct competition, so after sitting on that idea for a month, I told them. I was told that they were going to accept my resignation early. I told them, "Bullshit. You're firing me. If you think that I haven't had ample opportunity to mine whatever resources I'd want to steal, than you're an idiot. I've hated you for at least the last four years, and those conditions haven't changed. I'm leaving in one month unless you are firing me right now." And so I got fired. But it was stupid on their part, because even though they knew I was going they hadn't prepared for it and they nearly crippled themselves for a couple of weeks. Though, I suppose, there's no way to really prepare for a highly-trained employee to leave, and even if you have two weeks to hire someone the transition is never smooth.
My gut feeling are:
these guys really should have shown him the door when he first gave notice, for security reason,
then paid him for two weeks to avoid complicating the un-employement insurance,
Done it all nicely and thrown in a pleasant exit interview with coffee and donuts for good measure.
The Vice-President of Sales throwing him out the door, that in itself sounds hockey; I'd probably said something like "Sir, meaning no disrespect, but do you actually have the authority to fire people and remove them from the premises? That's pretty specialised and usually coordinated through HR, Legal and Security." I once had a boss that frequently fired me, sometimes several times a day. At first it bothered me, but after a while it got so he'd get pissed, come in and fire me and I'd get stand there with my arms crossed in front of my chest and look at him until he'd either get out of my face and let me work or actually ask for the keys to the building back.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
BTW, the above is not intended to be legal advice.
Goddamn lawyers.
Prov 9:8 Do not rebuke mockers or they will hate you; rebuke the wise and they will love you.
So, just because you don't have any work ethics, no one else should have any ?
What about temps ? Do you want them gone asap after hiring because they may be looking for their next job already ?
IANAL (but my sister-inlaw is an ADA in Texas!)
:)
:>
;) cl@xganon.com
1) Can they sue you? Sure they can try, but will it hold up in court? Probably not.
2) Will you have to defend your self? Sure, so get a lawyer NOW!
Now for the fun part
3) (IN Texas) By verbally notifying you of their intent to sue, (I hope you have a witness!) they are now financially responsible for the cost incurred in your preparation to defend your self should they not follow through with it. This means that if it was a scare tactic and they had no intent of suing you, they have to pay all your lawyers fees!
I know this because I used to run a large anonymous service. Every time I received a letter threating to sue me, my attorneys eyes would light up! It was like a bonus check for him
He would put in all the work preparing a defense (and some people can make BIG threats) then when he found their intent was not to sue, we would sue them.
I hope this helps!!
Oh, and if you are leaving does that mean that they have an opening.
IANAL, but I believe Texas is an "employment at will" state. This means that there is very little regulation of the employer / employee legal relationship outside of a contract / employment agreement. This means that an employer can terminate without cause and no notice, and an employee can leave without notice, without any negative *legal* ramifications.
However, that doesn't mean they can't sue you... this will force you to spend money on legal representation and make your life a little miserable even if the suit is ruled to be baseless. If it is and you've got a halfway decent lawyer, you might be able to get it dismissed with prejudice and your legal fees covered.
So why are they suing? Clearly they are burning any bridges with you, and aren't expecting to try to get you back. Unless you are independently wealthy, it's unlikely even if they succeeded that they would be able to collect enough in damages to make this worthwhile. This leaves two explanations I can think of: petty revenge, or to intimidate the rest of the employees. I'm betting on a combination of both, with a heavy dose of intimidation.
-R
If they've got a legitimate claim against you, you'd probably know about it.
/., but I sincerely hope you're listening the attorney you hired and not just us.
Did you take company documents with you when you left?
Did you have special access to trade secrets, business plans, etc?
Did you make any implicit agreement to stick around?
For example--If the policy manual says you can submit education expenses (get some license or cert) but you have to stick around for 1 year afterward--you agreed to stick around when you submitted the expenses.
Of course, anybody can sue anybody else for anything, and does it all the time.
The issue is not necessarily whether they can win the suit or not--you're probably being set out as an example for any other employees that might be thinking of jumping ship.
Thank you for raising an interesting question on
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, it doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
Just out of curiosity, and assuming of course that everything he wrote is true, what exactly would that better case be? "Your honor, he told the truth about events that he personally witnessed, and in a public forum to boot!"? Or maybe "He directed more traffic to our web site and potentially posted our Google page rank, with malice aforethought!"?
--MarkusQ
Actually, if you quit with less than two weeks notice in Ontario your employer is entitled to report your termination as a firing.
May be if would not be such a cynic if you read some of the articles by Robert Axelrod of Univ of Michigen on "Evolution of Cooperation", "Complexity of Cooperation", and BBC shows like "Nice Guys Finish First" by Richard Dawkins.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
How about suing your old company for hiring you in the first place?! :-)
The term for that is "at will", not "right to work". "Right to work" is shorthand for laws protecting non-union employees, such as forbidding an employer from making union membership a condition of employment.
Not only does the article contain the name of the employer, but the submitter linked to them, along with a couple Wikipedia articles describing documents the poster didn't sign. It's like he wasn't looking for advice, and just wanted to announce to a million geeks that Company X is bad.
This reads like a smear campaign. I'm surprised the editors didn't edit out the employer name, at least. If it's legit, then there's going to be bad blood and possibly legal repercussions.
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
I think it really depends on the person and how professional they are. As one of the senior guys in the group I was in, I gave notice months in advance. I then worked really hard to finish up the projects that I was working on, and transition as much of my knowledge as possible over to other employees. Even over a year later, I still do contract work for them. I'm an engineer, and I expect engineers to behave like the professionals that they are supposed to be. If you work at Taco Bell, then yeah, notice probably isn't in anyone's best interest.
Even if I were purely motivated by self-interest, wouldn't I want a source of good references for the future? Why burn bridges?
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Actually, it is the oposite: just because I have work ethics, I do not expect anyone else to.
When someone gives me notice, I send them home that day and usually pay out the rest of the week.
When I fire someone, I usually pay out the rest of the week; if they get paid the week after they work, I'll get them their last check as early as possible.
But once someone says "I'm leaving in two weeks", I cannot expect them to put 100% into their work -- and I certainly don't want them hanging around telling all my customers and employees about their great new job.
Running a company is a matter of managing liabilities: hey, if you do great work then I want you here. If I can no longer count on you to do great work, why would I keep you around? Even something as simple as a twisted ankle turns into an insurance claim and Workman Compensation issues; costs that I do not want to incure over someone who I know will not be working for me in 14 days.
Assuming that all we have been told is true (seems to be a few details missing), then call your local bar association for a referral. In most places, the initial consultation will cost only a modest amount, $25-$50 or so. An employer will often use a lawsuit to try to scare an employee who wants to leave, or to prevent them from working with a competitor. Most of the time these suits are baseless, but on the rare occasion they may have some merit. Get an Attorney to go over your contract and give you an opinion. I found myself in a similar situation once - I paid just $25 for the consultation, and the Attorney (after reviewing the contract) said that a suit (in my particular case) would most likely be dismissed out of hand. I took his advice, and my former employer never followed through on their threat.
Laws affecting technology will always be bad until enough techies become lawyers.
... opposed to being fired for Xeroxing your ass
and breaking the copier glass top doing so, leaving blood trail all the way back to your desk.
That's got to be a good reason no !!!
I recall it well, a technology company in London.
I interviewed for the job, and the guy describe something I'd done very successfully on my previous project. I was perfect for the job, and the interview was going well from his point of view, but not from mine. The company was in a crap location, out on a dumpy industrial estate, and I'd done that work before, exactly that work, it was something boring and repetitive to me.
The second interviewer could see I wasn't so keen and asked me if I'd be happy in that role, and I explained the problem. You could see the anger in the main guys face as I basically turned down the role. He got up, went out the room, the second guy explained the managers short fuse, and the main interviewer came back with security to escort me out of the building.
If you were escorted out and sued, it means you are GOOD AT YOUR JOB and you are important enough to get sued. Dude, it was a compliment.
Much of the time, these aren't contracts per se, but are requirements for at-will employment to keep your references, cash out your excess vacation days, etc. If you leave w/o sufficient notice at many places, you forfeit the PTO. That IS perfectly legal, an employer can basically do what they want with their leave policy.
I've always felt that giving notice of termination in my field of work (IT) is
extremely dangerous. If I have root on a number of production servers and access
to a data center, I've often felt that giving notice leaves you wide open for
blame if you share root with others. If you give notice and things start screwing
up, it'll be your fault, bank on it. And if Joe IT across the hall doesn't like
you, its trivial for him to screw things up deliberately and lay the blame at your
feet. It's also feasible that if there are severe ill feelings from management
because you're leaving, what better way to screw you over than to arrange for some
sabotage (real of pseudo) and blame it on you.
Not a chance.
When I decide it's time for me to leave, I gather my things and leave. Great time
to use up all those vacation days or unused lieu days. If not, sue me. I have a
lawyer, a really good one, here's her card.
mike
-- Karma whore? You betcha. --
I've quit three times, and given three weeks notice each time. Each time I spent the first week tying up loose ends, and the second week not doing much. (In fact, on monday of the last week at a big office, my boss told me "Don't do anything important".)
Now, each time I've moved to a new job that was in a substantially different field than the one before, so there was little danger of either taking secrets or other employees with me. I feel like it worked out pretty well both for me (I got a chance to say goodbye to everyone I wanted to personally) and the company (they knew I wasn't leaving anything unfinished).
Coincidentally, we've got a guy here who's last day is today (he gave notice weeks and weeks ago, he's rather senior). He's still working, which makes me very nervous, because it shows it's going to be a big scramble when he goes. I feel a week's salary is a small price to pay for the assurance the transition is going to be smooth.
It's not wasting time, I'm educating myself.
Why not ? The ones who will slack off before leaving would be dumb if they told you about it.
and I certainly don't want them hanging around telling all my customers and employees about their great new job.
In that case, you better hire a good hit man instead. Or how else do you want to keep them from talking to their colleagues outside of work ? Maybe they have their cellphone numbers, maybe they're even friends, maybe they even go out for a drink after work. Heck. Maybe they'll even us the internet in one form or another. Also, see above. The ones who do want really want to badmouth your company would be dumb if they gave any notice. They'll do what they want to do and then quit without notice.
And the company is doing them a favor by giving them 100% of their time with pay. How is this anything other than a positive solution to both sides?
There are always individual cases, but if it's just a random person turning in notice, you don't want the risk that they will do something bad (even accidentally) when you have no more recourse over them.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
I left a job once that I hated, and though I wanted to burn the bridges and give them a big middle finger, I took the mature route. I did my two weeks, and helped to close out some of my projects and give some training on specific knowledge I had.
Two years later I found myself unemployed with a low bank account and a couple of mouths to feed. The job market was crappier then than it is right now. They took me back in. I have no doubt about what would have happened if I had acted like an asshole.
William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
If you leave w/o sufficient notice at many places, you forfeit the PTO. That IS perfectly legal, an employer can basically do what they want with their leave policy.
Um, no.
If you have that as part of a contract, then yes, they can do (almost) anything you signed off on.
If "at will" and you have vacation hours (and sometimes even sick time) as part of your compensation, they damned well better pony up for it when you leave. And no, you don't need to give notice, sign anything at the exit interview, or the like. "At will" means "at will" - Either party can break off the relationship whenever the hell they want, but that doesn't excuse either side from fulfilling obligations that predate the parting of ways (though conveniently, such obligations almost always fall on the employer).
And the first witness is an Anonymous Coward ...
But the good thing is that if you don't like the outcome, you just moderate it down until nobody sees it any more.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
It isn't because someone is not professional that you should act professional.
I hated the guts of my ex-boss when I left a job a year and a half ago. It was for a big company, I was a Manager there. It was toward the end of a project for which I was managing the infrastructure part, I gave 6 weeks notice so I could make sure the project was done on my side and everybody trained to take over from me.
I left with a great reputation. Reputation and work ethic is one of your best asset if you want to build a name and career for yourself. Business world is a small world, your reputation preceeds you and you often run into the same people even in different jobs.
oh, and I left that job with pride AND a smile! Because my part of the project even though I left was the ONLY part that was finished ON TIME and under budget. My boss' part was late and his ass got fired! My reputation is intact & great, his, well...
You were fired, you did not quit. Giving two weeks notice is saying, "I am going to quit in two weeks." You can apply for unemployement for the 2 weeks, unless you can start early at the new job.
They can sue, but it is not likely they would win. The new employer may not like it.
Fight Spammers!
Wow, an abrasive AC that didn't understand the parent post. I'm shocked.
He isn't saying that he's doing the equivalent of firing someone after they give their notice. He's letting the person go home and is paying them for the two weeks. This is very standard practice among companies and benefits BOTH sides. The employee isn't in the office POSSIBLY giving sub-standard work, affecting morale, or remaining a liability for their last two weeks of work. If the employee is evil, they're now deprived of the opportunity of causing problems.
Absolutely, two weeks notice is a courtesy. And employers appreciate that. But not all employers have a need to utilize the employee for those two weeks, and if you can get by without them, it is in your best interests to do so.
I've always looked at jobs this way. It's a business contract between to parties. You agree to work, they agree to pay you. If and when either party decides that the agreement is no longer satisfactory, they can terminate the agreement.
It's really that simple. I once worked for a company that shut the doors at our branch with no notice whatsoever. We all came to work and the boss was there with a lock for the door. He told us we had 30 minutes to get our stuff and go home. You know, that's the way it goes sometimes. I have never held a grudge about it. And so if I find a better opportunity that is going to make me happier, or provide my family with a better income, I'm gone folks. No hard feelings.
Don't feel bad about being escorted out, that's a common practice in every IT shop I've worked for. A disgruntled IT employee can do a lot of damage in two weeks.
As for the lawsuit, sounds like a load of crap to me. What are you, an indentured servant?
How the heck the previous comment got modded "insightful" is beyond me. "Petty" or "small minded" would be better choices.
What was once true, is no longer so
It depends on the business and the individual. It's about managing costs (risks) and benefits. If the business can get by fine without the employee, you might be better off letting them go home after they give their notice. If you need to continue to use them for a few days, or a week, or the full two weeks, and it's worth the risks, then it's perfectly appropriate to do so.
Some large companies make it a policy to release people as soon as they give notice, maybe because large companies are less personal and are at a greater risk of having people leave on bad terms. Others may not. It depends on how you want to run your business. There are good reasons in either direction and a good manager balances those with the needs of the business.
I believe that may be legal. 43 states have At-Will employment. It allows an employee to quit for no reason. UNLESS, you are under contract. If you are under contract they can't fire you and you can't leave untill the contract is up. IMHO it sounds like a crappy place to work and I am sure you can 'stick it to the man' if you tried to leave. Check you state labor laws and most states even have hot lines to call.
Half of writing history is hiding the truth.
If the position is so hard to fill, then maybe they should try to actually KEEP people. Or maybe they should hire enough people to cross train, so they aren't screwed, and so employees aren't as pressured that they're the only ones who know this.
Nah. Then it wouldn't be an esoteric lesson in "free markets" that allow employers to enslave employees.
I'm surprised you'd offer that advice with no knowledge of the details of the case. On its face, this guy's story sounds unbelievable, but that's often because there's more to the story. It could be that they're "legally clueless", but we don't know that.
Being a professional and finishing up your projects is a good way to encourage goodwill should you choose to come back, and also to get good references. It would be nice if things really worked like that. I have been dropped into somebody else's half finished project plenty of times after that person left for another job at short notice. I suspect that in this case the guy would not have been sued if he hadn't gone to a direct competitor. I don't live in the USA but over here companies have also used lawsuits like this, or threatened to do so, to intimidate their employees into not switching jobs. Of course they reserved the right to fire the employee at a moments notice, after all, what could be more natural than expecting complete loyalty from the employee but at the same time reserving the right to treat him/her like a commodity? When this issue was finally tested in court in this country the employee was backed by lawyers form his trade-association/union and the case was shot down in court even though the employer had put a clause into the guy's contract. The clause apparently violated laws about freedom of employment. The former employer had to pay the costs of the proceedings so this threat has lost a lot of it's terror value on this side of the Atlantic. Of course laws may differ in the USA.... Personally I will treat an employer with no more respect I get from him. The better the employer the nicer I will be about quitting...
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
If they report it as a firing, then you are entitled to EI. All the better for the employee. They don't usually give you EI if you quit. Unless you have good reasons such as excessive stress for leaving. I don't see how it would be a disadvantage to be fired, when if you're leaving on that short notice, you're probably not expecting a good reference. I don't see a problem, unless future employers can look at your record of employment, not sure if they can, and if they can, not sure if many do.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
I am a Texas attorney, and, while I cannot give you specific legal advice without knowing the facts regarding your situation, generally in a situation like this I would suggest that the employee not worry about it until they are actually sued, but to be proactive. Unfortunately, companies with deep pockets sometimes just choose to make former employees' lives miserable. If there is no non-compete or employment agreement, suits such as this are generally based on common-law trade secret misappropriation or the Texas theft liability act. If the employee has no idea why they are being sued, it may be beneficial to send a letter (certified return receipt requested) asking why they are suing and what the employee did to cause this and what they can do to avoid it - as an effort to prevent litigation, this may provide grounds to recoup attorney's fees if a suit results. Another thing to keep in mind is that if the threats of a suit negatively impact the employee's relationship with their new employer, they may have grounds for a suit or counterclaim against the previous employer.
Well, labor and employment law is complicated, but fortunately my wife used to practice it. :) Basically, a contract cannot restrict you from making a living. If you are a real estate agent, and you sign an employment contract that keeps you from working for a competing real estate agency within some geographic area, that contract is not enforcible - it is restricting you from making a living. In general, the lower you are on the totem pole, the more sympathetic the courts will be. I think in layman's terms (which is all that I understand), an employment contract is not all that strong because you really don't have much of a bargaining position - especially if you are in an entry level position. Contracts are not supposed to valid if signed under duress.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
When someone gives me notice, I send them home that day and usually pay out the rest of the week.
I take it you don't have anyone with specialized knowledge...
I'm planning on leaving my job in about a year (starting school), and I know that the amount of specialized knowledge I have would make me nearly impossible to replace within a short time frame. As a result, I'm going to give a month notice for them, and also start pouring out every bit of relevant knowledge into a comprehensive handbook for my eventual successor. It will probably take most of that month to write, but it will buy them years of productivity.
There is a lot of incest in the local job market -- anyone who leaves would almost be expected to take some underlings and accounts with them. That is why -- again, generally -- I must get people out of the office as soon as I know they have another job.
Now I can tell you the parable of the $22 commission.
There was a company. The sold big dollar equipment. $30,000 or more per sale. They had 5 or 6 people in the filed. And back at the company. They had one guy who handled all the after market stuff. They sold about $350,000 a year in after market stuff.
This guy, had a sick relative in the area, had just moved to town, and was willing to work for anything. So they started him out at $22,000.00 a year. He told them he would work hard, and talk about salary after a year. He went to work, went through 20 file cabinets of old records and cold called everyone who had ever bought a piece of equipment from the company. Asked them if they still had it around or used it. Got some of them to start using it. Would call some people and say "hey, it has been 3 months since you ordered, I am having a slow week, help me out."
Bottom line, after 3 months, he outsold, everyone out in the filed, by selling $300.00 of stuff at a time. He also sold 10 or 11 systems in that time...but he did not get credit for those, only the "in the field" reps got credit. Turned after market from $350,000 into better than $1,100,000. Not bad work for the year.
So the year is up, they offered him a raise, of 50 cents. Yes, from $22,000.00 a year to $23,000.00 though he could demonstrate that he made the company an extra million a year in after market and equipment sales.
So a competitor heard about him, and offered him $36,000.00 per year starting pay, promised to have him at $48,000.00 inside of two years, PLUS profit sharing and his commissions. He took it. Gave two weeks notice and offered to train his replacement. Well, they fired him on the spot.
You know what, he was cool with that. So he got his pay, But for what he sold that month, he should of had a commission check of about $270.00. We had talked, and he was going to leave his old customers alone, and just build his business by cold calling from their old files at the new company.
Well, they sent him a commission check of $22.00. When he complained that he sold "x" that month and it should be about $270.00 they told him he did not work there any more and that was just to bad....
At that point, he decided, Over that $250.00 he would take every customer he could. Now I will note, he had almost a photographic memory. he Knew all the prices on the products, what the markups were, and most of his own customers. He had no problem at all moving them over.
So the company he had worked for, in addition to losing him, by being cheap. Also lost, what has amount to several million dollars in sales over the course of a few years, because they thought screwing him out of $250.00 was a funny thing to do. And make no mistake, if they would have given him that $250.00, he would have left them alone. It went from "ethical" to "personal" with the way they had treated him at that point.
vi +
If you feel you can't trust them after they give notice, how can you trust them the day before? The only thing that's changed is that the you no longer have the threat of termination to use against them. If that's the only basis you have for "trusting" them, you've got bigger problems with your business management than employees who've given notice.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
Two years ago I did the same thing for much the same reason. I was walked out of the office about 4 hours after I gave notice and received the notice of their intent to sue the next morning. It turns out that they had no basis for a lawsuit and would have probably lost (they were claiming "inevitable disclosure of proprietary information" as the reason, which apparently has never been won in Mass.) but it would have cost me a bundle. To make matters worse I was entitled to some fairly valuable stock options (I know, I should have exercised before submitting my resignation) which they threatened to withhold based on a secret (not communicated to anyone) that allowed them to withhold options basically for any reason they want. In any event, it took three months to work out a settlement. Luckily my new company picked up the legal bills but I was unemployed without the ability to file for unemployment during that time. What a pain.
I mean, I wouldn't recommend giving someone "the finger"....and it does take several weeks for that Sharpie smiley-face you drew on your ass to finally wear off.
not that I speak from personal experience or anything.
A goal is a dream with a deadline
California is an at-will employment state meaning your employer can (and often will - because that's how employers are) release you at any time without notice. As an employee, you can leave at any time without notice as well (though it's not considered professional and word *will* get around). As long as you did not sign anything - including forms stating you received an Employee Handbook - which may have some sort of employment agreement in it - the employer can do nothing to you. I have worked for employers that use this sort of thing as a scare tactic. One thing I've heard often from lawyers is "They [the person you are having trouble with] can do anything they want [legally] until you catch them."
I've had former employers try to screw me in various ways that they knew were outside the law. As soon as I called their bluff and stated I would sue them for all they were worth (and it's very effective when you can quote the pertinent law backing your claims), it's amazing how fast they backpedal.
I can't say how the law in your particular state might read.
IANAL, but I have been through the legal system more times than I'd like.
PGA
When someone gives me notice, I send them home that day and usually pay out the rest of the week.
When I fire someone, I usually pay out the rest of the week; if they get paid the week after they work, I'll get them their last check as early as possible.
But once someone says "I'm leaving in two weeks", I cannot expect them to put 100% into their work -- and I certainly don't want them hanging around telling all my customers and employees about their great new job.
Well, I don't know what industry you work in, or what kind of workers you're hiring, but that seems like a particularly cynical view to take. I am a professional, and I work with and for professionals. And usually when you're dealing with professionals you don't have to worry as much about those sorts of issues.
For example, I just put in my notice this past Tuesday. I gave my employer about 2.5 weeks notice that I was leaving. It wasn't a situation where I hate the company that I work for, or the people that I work with, I was just looking for a new challenge (I joined this place in when it was a startup, now it's a mature company). Everyone that I work with respects that, and I'll be working out my notice.
During those two and a half weeks I will be wrapping up the projects that I can complete, and transitioning the ones that I can't complete to other team members. I'll be doing a lot of knowledge transfer as well. But I doubt that I'll be taking on any new projects. So technically you're right in saying that I won't be working at 100%, but the work that I will be doing will be key to making sure that my department continues to operate smoothly after I'm gone. And of course I will be available for the occasional call or email after I'm gone if they have a question about something that I had been working on. It's just good business not to burn bridges.
Now if my employer had shown me the door the minute I turned in my notice, they would be fairly screwed. The projects that I was working on would grind to a crawl (if not an outright stop) while someone else tries to figure out where we were when I was escorted out. Any specific or specialized knowledge would be lost. No knowledge transfer would take place. I would probably be somewhat resentful about the way I was treated and therefore be unwilling to help them out with any of the mess.
And what would that get you? Sure, I wouldn't be walking around your office talking to coworkers about my great new job, but if you think that coworkers don't talk to each other from time to time outside of work then you're mistaken. So that word would still get around. I'd also be likely to tell my future coworkers about how you treated me when I turned in my notice. I would be extremely unlikely to want to work for or with you again, and my friends and future coworkers would know why. This could potentially impact your ability to find future employees. Not having the knowledge transfer or a smooth transition also runs up costs associated with employee turnover. If I can offer some measure of training to the people who will be replacing me then I can save you money.
Running a company is a matter of managing liabilities: hey, if you do great work then I want you here. If I can no longer count on you to do great work, why would I keep you around?
I disagree. Running a company includes managing liabilities, but it's about far more than that. You also have to manage people and relationships (and lots of other things that aren't necessarily relevant here). If your people aren't happy, or you have a negative relationship towards your workers then your business will suffer. Not just in reduced productivity, but also in reduced reputation. Both of those will cost you money.
And I also think that it's ridiculous to think that just because someone is leaving the company that you can no longer count on them to do great work. If someone is a professional and you are paying them for work then I see no reason
I wouldn't worry too much.
Slavery was abolished in 1865.
Also there is no judge in the world, that is going to say "There is no way are allowed to provide for your family."
my $.02
-lnr
First, if you didn't sign a non-compete or other contract then YOU are not contractually obligated to anything. Texas, like most states, is an work-at-will state. So you can come and go as you please. Now, if you have knowledge of sensitive company information that your new employer can use against your current employer, then Company A (current) can sue Company B (new). For example, Wal-Mart was able to block some key people leaving them to go to work for a competitor. The issue was that the employees had inside knowledge of price contracts Wal-Mart had with certain vendors. The federal court deemed this sensitive company information and blocked it. Microsoft was able to do the same. However, if they sue you, then you have a strong countersuit. It is illegal to attempt to block a person's employment without being able to prove that the move will be detrimental to the company. You could make out well with pain and suffering. I would contact the EEOC and talk to someone.
You're absolutely right, but people don't always think that way.
I'd been contracting for a company for a while, and they asked me to come on full-time. I thought it would be a great opportunty to do some cool stuff, and get some experience inside the company, before I went on to do other things, so I decided I'd work for them for a year and then move on.
Well, I made the mistake of thinking it would be considerate to tell them that I only wanted to work for a year; that seriously screwed up the negotiations for a few weeks.
The thing is, if I'd just come and worked for them, and then after a year decided to leave, nobody would have batted an eyelash. In fact, while I had been contracting for them, they had had a new CEO come on and then leave after 6 months. But because I told them up front, it was a big deal.
The manager I was talking told me about how they'd be afraid to give me important projects to work on if they knew I'd be leaving, because it would be harder for someone else to maintain or fix when I was gone. Well, I'm sorry dude, but that's the situation with every employee in your company. They may leave at any time, and if they do, you'll have to deal with someone else taking over his code.
Anyway, they've lost their right to that kind of consideration from me. Two weeks is all they're going to get.
TCP: Why the Internet is full of SYN.
http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/FAQ_Paydays.htm
8. Q. I just gave my employer two weeks advance notice that I was quitting. Instead of letting me work until the date of my resignation, he told me that I was discharged, and instructed me to collect my personal belongings and leave. Upon leaving he gave me a check for all wages earned up through my last hour of work. Am I entitled to be paid for the time that I gave notice? Additionally, when must my final wages be paid?
A. You are not entitled to any wages for the notice period because you did not perform any work during that period. For the purpose of wage payments, your employer changed a quit into a discharge, and all of your earned wages became due and payable immediately at the time he terminated you. Giving notice is purely a courtesy. It legally can not affect recommendations or references This I'm skeptical of because every employee handbook I've been subject to says no notice = no references. I lost good references because I didn't give a full two weeks notice, which was the company's policy.
That's odd, when I was unemployed a few years ago, the Census Bureau called me every couple months to ask my status, even after I stopped getting unemployment.
You can get accurate unemployment figures from the US government.