You're Fired! -- I Quit!

lhill

We terminated an employee for gross safety violations last week. He went outside to clean out his truck, came back in 10 minutes and said that he'd rather quit than be fired. My initial reaction was "Yes!". The Workforce Commission, however, told me we'd might as well let the termination stand. We had good documentation, and could win an unemployment claim if it went that far. What do you think? Would you have let him quit?

ray a

We had a supervisor who was guilty of violating our harassment policy. When we fired him, he asked to quit instead. We let him, but I documented everything. I would vote for letting him resign which provides an even stronger case against UI.

TN HR

Given the scenario you described I would not accept a resignation in lieu of termination. I'm not saying it isn't always appropriate, because I believe sometimes it is better option for both parties, but not in this case. My rationale here is that you want to send the message loud and clear: If you violate safety guidelines, you will be terminated, end of story! Besides, if you're ever inspected by OSHA, I would not want to explain to the inspector how accepting a resignation translates into enforcement of your policies and punishing offenders.

Gene

HRinFL

I agree with Gene. You made the decision to discharge - carry it through. In a situation of "gross misconduct," I think you create a liability if you do not follow your established precedent. I think every ee would rather resign than be discharged, but once the decision has been made to terminate someone, I think you have a level of accountability to stand behind the decision. No one takes these decisions lightly and as long as you have the doumentation to support your decision, I believe you made the right one.

Plus, I would argue that once the decision has been communicated to the ee, it is done. But maybe that is The Don starting to rub off on me!

Don D

Right on Gene! You nailed it brother!

TN HR

>Right on Gene! You nailed it brother!

Hopefully this earned me enough brownie points to overcome the thong underwear, handicapped parking and shotguns-n-whiskeys wisecracks

dchr9203

Nope. If he had quit before the termination, then it would be a resignation. He was fired, therefore, he doesn't get to quit because he's no longer employed.

Crout

I agree with Gene, and would add that even if you let him resign he could still claim to the UI office that you coerced the resignation, and could win benefits based on that. Stick with the truth of the matter.

lhill

Thanks to you all for the input. The ee has decided he is going to the EEOC since I wouldn't let him resign. Don't know what's up there. I thought that was for discrimination.

Don D

Draw him a map.

Balloonman1

Uh hello EEOC I have a complaint. My old company woudl not let me quit. I see sir, why was that ? Well they fired me........ Hhmmmm okay I am lost. Well they fired me, and I told them they could not fire me, that I quit. They said I could not quit as I had already been terminated. Well sir, you no longer work there isn't that wha tyou what? Yes but I dont wanna be fired by dem bums, I wanted to quit.
"click" Hello...helloo...

You have to love morons, they do provide us with som much entertainment.............

DJ The Balloonman

Whatever

Having had this once (sort of) (they didn't want to quit, they didn't want to be fired). The line was they were over 40, suffered high blood pressure, member of a minority etc.etc...they left out the part that the supervisor caught them on a cel phone while operating a forklift (a serious safety violation) and that they had previously been suspended for the same offense.
By the way, the EEOC does not like being lied to.