

A Protip When Giving Two-Weeks Notice - forrestthewoods
http://forrestthewoods.com/a-protip-when-giving-two-weeks-notice/

======
tptacek
_During my talk with HR I should have politely presented the following three
options._

 _They fire me. I go home. I notify the state and collect unemployment
benefits until my new job starts._ _I sit at home for two weeks doing nothing,
collect my regular paycheck, and avoid all distractions._ _I work for another
two weeks and have my last day like normal._

This ultimatum constitutes constructive resignation, which is disqualifying
for unemployment insurance benefits. I wouldn't take any advice from someone
who believes this to be a reasonable position. The correct response to an
employer who severs you early in your 2-weeks notice is to thank them. The 2
weeks notice is an obligation on you, not them.

------
chrisbennet
I try to avoid companies that are big enough to have an HR department. While I
was discussing what I thought about a position at a company with their HR
person I actually told her that the fact that they were big enough to have HR
department was a strike against them. <g>

When I've gone to new jobs, they always wanted me to start as soon a possible
so the OP's scenario wouldn't normally be a problem. It's never happened to me
but if it did I'd just start 2 weeks sooner at the new job.

~~~
Evbn
ProTip for meeting a coworker before a new job: maybe have an open mind about
this person being helpful to you instead of spouting a prejudgement about
their existence being a problem.

~~~
chrisbennet
I meant no offense. Companies "that are big enough to have an HR department"
are generally bigger than the size of companies I like working for. It wasn't
a dig at HR. Replace "HR department" with "front desk receptionist/dedicated
IT/security badges/have a cafeteria" if that will make my preferences less
offensive.

------
ramblerman
The 2 weeks notice is for the party being notified. Not the other way around.

When you suddenly quit you leave them high and dry. Which is where the notice
comes in. If however they don't need your services anymore either then it's
perfectly reasonable for you to mutually end the contract.

I mean what are you really complaining about. You wanted to quit and they said
OK.

~~~
meepmorp
> I mean what are you really complaining about. You wanted to quit and they
> said OK.

More accurately, he wanted to take a new job in 2 weeks and got sent home
without pay for that time. Not everyone can afford that gap. What's more, I
don't see this as a complaint, so much, but as a retrospective analysis of how
s/he might better have handled things to his/her own advantage.

~~~
Evbn
If his new employer wouldn't welcome him earlier under the changed
circumstance, it probably wasn't a very good career move...

------
polemic
Another reminder of how brutal employment law in the US is. Hard to believe
that it's legal for a company to act in that way.

~~~
chiph
23 states (+/-) have Right-To-Work laws, meaning that either party can fire
the other at any time without notice.

As Jack Welch of General Electric put it: "You got paid on Friday, therefore
we're even."

As I put it: "You paid me for the work I did, therefore we're even."

~~~
rprasad
That's not what a right-to-work law is.

Right to work laws are related to union workforces; they allow non-union
employees to work in otherwise unionized workforces without requiring them to
join the union (and thus be forced to pay union dues as a de facto condition
of employment).

You actually refer to at-will labor laws, which describe the laws of all 50
states in the U.S. "At will" means that either party can terminate the
employment agreement at any time, without notice, unless notice is first
required by the terms of the employment agreement.

2 weeks is the standard notice required in most employment agreements that
require notice, but _2 weeks notice is not required in most situations_. It's
simply the polite thing to do if you don't want to burn bridges. (I've worked
with many people who gave more than 2 weeks notice, and a few who left the
same afternoon they gave notice.)

~~~
chiph
You're right - I got the term wrong. I shouldn't be posting that early on a
weekend.

So embarrassed...

------
Gertig
A useful tale, a shame this didn't get any traction on HN.

------
taloft
I like option 1: "You can fire me. I won't quit!"

------
cmccabe
So what. If they decide to fire you before the effective date of your
resignation, you're eligible for unemployment benefits and/or the severance
package. I've known a few people who knew that layoffs were coming, but chose
to stay anyway, simply because they wanted the severance payout and were
confident they could find a new job relatively quickly.

Financially, you usually come out ahead, although you now have to admit that
you have been fired in the past. (Interestingly, layoffs are legally distinct
from firings.) But if you already have a new job lined up, I don't think it's
that important.

Looking at the bigger picture, if they weren't willing to keep you on for your
last two weeks, either they saw you as not that important or useful at the
company, or the company is in serious financial trouble. Either way, you're
probably better off forgetting about that company and enjoying your extra two
weeks.

~~~
danielweber
I think this may vary by state. A friend gave 2-weeks notice and was fired
immediately (from a non-tech-sector job) and said that, according to the
state, he wasn't eligible for unemployment, because he had resigned.

I was unwilling to dig through the laws enough to find out for sure. Until he
told me this, my understanding was the same as yours.

~~~
cmccabe
_I think this may vary by state. A friend gave 2-weeks notice and was fired
immediately (from a non-tech-sector job) and said that, according to the
state, he wasn't eligible for unemployment, because he had resigned._

Probably there was some kind of paperwork that the office had to file to make
him eligible, which it didn't occur to them to do in this case. I'm willing to
bet that its something they should have done, although I could definitely be
wrong.

~~~
danielweber
It seems that unemployment shouldn't function that way: the employer has to
actively deny the UI claim, not have to do work to make their own UI premiums
go up.

Said friend may also suffer from social anxiety and just not want to talk to
the UI office.

By all means, anyone in this situation should call your state's unemployment
office to find out. The worst they can do is say no. The one time I got laid
off I was amazed at how nice they were.

------
rprasad
2 weeks notice is only required by _either side_ if the employment agreement
requires it. (2 weeks = 2 weeks before the _intended_ departure date, not the
actual departure date.) Otherwise, the standard is that either party can
terminate the agreement at any time. Professional employment contracts
(lawyers, accountants, programmers) usually have a 2-week notice requirement
on the employee, but not on the employer. This is to allow for the orderly
transition or wind-down of the employee's responsibilities to other employees.
If the employer is terminating you immediately, they've already figured out
what to do or effected the transition, so the 2 weeks is unnecessary. (Union
contracts usually have a lengthy process for terminating employees, which is
goverened by a very different set of rules (and laws)).

Ergo, the suggestions Forrest makes in his blog post _make no sense_. He gave
2 weeks notice. His company did not need the full 2 weeks to transition his
workload to another employee, so they terminated him the next day (or rather,
the next business day).

------
Evbn
Forrest got lucky by leaving. Imagine what management at that company does to
their employees every day, including spontaneous firing.

I have never had a job where my last two weeks weren't full of important brain
dumping and transition meetings.

