Reasons for termination-Obligation to tell?

jscheidter

Is it legal for an At-Will employer in FL to terminate an employee and not give a reason why, even though there is a legitimate reason? We tell employees that their services are no longer needed and when they ask why they are being fired, we tell them that it is company policy not to discuss the details of termination. We do this for all employees who are terminated.

LindaS

I would think this type of answer may get you into trouble, or at least cost you some unnecessary legal fees, even though you are an at-will employer. Failure to inform an employee why they are being terminated just allows their imaginations to "run wild" and may result in quite a few discrimination/wrongful termination claims that could easily have been avoided if you had just given them the information at the time of termination.

Is there some speific reason, other than company policy, why you do not give them that information? Think of how you would feel if you were told you were being terminated, and not know why.

bbarrett

I am in TX and we are an At-Will state also. No you do not have to give a reason but you will pau unemployment. We do the same thing when we term employees to to a business decision we have to let you go. End of story.

LFernandes

We are an at-will state as well in NY (interestingly enough I recently found out that the only state NOT at will is Montana) but we give them just the bare bones, i.e.; performance, excessive absences, reorganization or restructuring, etc. We don't however, release that type of information during a reference check. We only give dates and title.

LFernandes

hrmgrmscw

LindaS had a good point: how would we feel if no reason at all is given? I am not sure what at-will or not-at-will has to do with it? Say what you can, no more, but give people a decent explanation. They worked for an employer, stuck around (for whatever reason), received benefits, spent a good part of their lives at work, and I am sure, believe they treated the employer right (at least the majority did). And, by the way, might have heard from the employer that they are valued as employees...

Also, I don't think a no-explanation answer helps with the morale of those who stay. Of course, we all get used to things but we never forget...

FrayWitzer

To me, it depends on the choices available. Some people/companies are very uncomfortable telling people the real reason for their termination (i.e. your work product was awful), and are tempted to supply a white lie answer (i.e. we just lost a big account and need to cut back). The problem is, the white lie reasons come back to haunt you in the subsequent discrimination lawsuit. The non-answer answer at least has the benefit of not setting up the disgruntled employee's argument that the reason given was a pretext.

Evan

psrcello

Evan,

I absolutely agree with you. This doesn't mean that a "no answer" is going to prevent a former employee from filing a charge. We had one employee who got a "no answer" and filed a charge with the state DOL that listed every possible incident that had ever happened to him in his five years of employment with us in order to substantiate discrimination on the basis of gender, race, disability, retaliation, and age - generated about three pounds of documentation to defend!

In most cases, however, the less said about the reason for discharge, the better, as long as what is said is the truth.

Paula

Shadowfax

I think the general advice (at least in Mi) is tonot give a reason for the term. It may go back to a case (bad law, I think) where the employer gave an at will employee a reason (theft) but which the employee proved to be wrong. Employer said, no harm no foul - at will - could have let gowithout reason. Court said faulty analysis, pay the employee. So, if no reason given, no cause of action (except statutory dscrmntn etc), but give a wrong reason, just bought yourself some liability. Short version: if you give a reason, and even end up being correct, you could spend a ton in legals defending your reason; no reason - no litigation.