Gave Notice, has to go, pay for notice?
clackey
18 Posts
I would like to know what are your practices regading pay when an employee gives two week notice, but you need to let the employee go before the two weeks. Do you pay the two weeks? do you pay only the time worked until you ask employee to leave?
I have an employee who gave two weeks notice, but we want to let him go sooner (like monday). I just want to pay for the time worked, but first I would like to kow what is common practice.
Thank you.
I have an employee who gave two weeks notice, but we want to let him go sooner (like monday). I just want to pay for the time worked, but first I would like to kow what is common practice.
Thank you.
Comments
Edit: If you do let him go and not pay him for the period of notice, and he files a claim for UI, he will certainly prevail. You will be considered to have terminated him. If for some reason his new opportunity does not develop, he will be entitled to draw UI for 26 weeks. In addition to the UI and fairness issues, you will also send a loud, clear message to all employees that if they do the right thing and give you notice, you will terminate them immediately anyway. (D.D.)
When someone at our agency gives notice and (for whatever reasons, like security or suspicion of animosity) we decide to have them off work before their two weeks are up, we strongly suggest to them (by completing the Time Off Request for them) that they use accrued paid time off for the balance of their service time. They're going to get that pay with their last check anyway, so it reduces our costs to have them use just the paid leave instead of giving the paid leave in addition to unworked (unearned) wages. They get paid for the time not worked, either way. If they don't have two weeks of leave on the books, then there wasn't really any purpose for them to give notice anyway, as getting the paid leave upon termination is really the only reason to give notice, from an employee's perspective.
I'm curious as to what everyone's process is for deciding whether to let someone off before their notice time is up. We do it only if we suspect that the soon-to-be-ex employee intends malicious activity. Otherwise, we use the time left on the job to find and train the replacement. If there's only a hint of malice, we may really pare down the employee's access to sensitive data, but the time worked is essentially more valuable to us than the risk of damage.
x:-)
>the EE use PTO for the balance of the two weeks,
>what does that mean? Do you tell them that
>they'll be fired unless they use PTO?
Oh, no!. We suggest that they take a vacation before launching into their next career option - use that PTO for it's intended reason. Maybe I should have said "encourage." And, as far as I know, no employee has refused the suggestion/encouragement. There's no penalty if the employee wants to stay on for the two weeks, unless you consider less access to data a penalty. Actually, now that I think about it, if we REALLY wanted someone out, we probably would say "take PTO or you're fired," because we should have fired them before we received notice.
>Unless your State is unusually restrictive, I
>don't see how either one of your scenarios will
>protect your company from UI liability. It's
>pretty simple: If the EE give two-weeks notice
>and you want he/she gone sooner, but you do not
>want UI liability, you must pay them for the two
>weeks.
Honestly, I typically don't worry about UI. If the employee "deserves" it, we don't fight it, and if they don't deserve it, they typically don't get it. I mean, if an employee gives a two week notice, they're typically responsible enough to have searched for and found another job to move to after leaving us. It's the employees who don't give notice that are most likely to claim UI, in my experience anyway.
It is known by all that "loyality" both ways is important, therefore, one must be prepared to leave within moments of a resignation and they most likely, will need some cash to help them get through with currently a "stop in pay and medical coverage". Our insurance ends on the day of the termination. We do pay out sick and vacation hours earned, if appropriate. We also take premium coverage and loss of uniforms and equipment from their last paychecks, if necessary to control the cost of same. If the individual is a "computer player", then we take control over the computer immediately. We shut it down by password change and make it incapable of entry from outside. Our receptionist pulled a good one on us before she turned her resignation in she erased all sorts of stuff, but thank goodness she did not realize that our corporate headquarters does back up of every single on-line computer several times a day. So what she erased we were able to pull up from North Carolina. She thought she was so smart and hurt us big time, but poor thing did not realize that a one time delete does not finish the deal. We were able to go into her "delete trash barrel" and pull back everything not cleared from there for the several hours of work accomplished prior to her issuance of her resignation.
Good Luck!
PORK
Not that I have even one tiny malicious bone in my body, mind you; I've worked too hard to get my employer to this point to turn around and destroy it. But I guess my example can serve as a warning to all those other employers out there who have handed their "keys to the kingom" over to one individual who may not be very happy with their employment situation. Be ready to shut down at a moment's notice, and have backup backups.
This will probably vary a little from state to state, but in most cases that I am aware of, if an ER does not let the EE work out the notice and does not pay them in full for that notice, the UI review boards look on that as a termination and will award compensation for whatever period the EE qualifies for.