Terminated - Job Seeking Advice and Discussion - Over 200 Posts with Advice

[energy]

I'm just paranoid

David,

For a moment there, I thought you were Bill Tomasso masquerading as an Aussie Bloke. The mind is a terrible thing when the wires get frayed. Later Guy.

 

[energy]

Re: Been There

tarheel said:

Energy, I was in the same situation last year. Came back from vacation and the boom was lowered. It took awhile to lick my wounds, but I was lucky to find a job, although at a 40% paycut, but I am still counting my blessings. Hang in there, I know it is tough.

tar,

It happened ten years ago when I was 49. Been there. It also took 10 1/2 months to find something. 40% cut? That's not bad. It's better than nothing. It's only been a week, but those old feelings-long forgotten, didn't waste anytime getting here. I received an e-mail from the consultant on the ill-fated ISO attempt yesterday. One sentence in the personal message stood out. "You gave it the old college try, but ran into the proverbial immovable object." That sums it up, for me. Probably why I'm angry and upset. Is it a performance issue? Maybe. But if any part of that "immovable object" reported to me, they would be sitting where I am a long time ago.

Me? I'll probably take 30%. That is, if there is an offer!!

 

[Mike S.]

Energy,

Sounds like the consultant nailed it right. If it were truly a performance issue (on your part), and if the company were a decent one, you would have received a verbal warning and if necessary a written warning detailing the specifics of the "performance issue" prior to being shown the door. That's just customary for any kind of a decent company IMO even though you may be an "employment-at-will" state.

Is there anyone there higher-up the ladder who would give you a written recommendation/reference? Any customers/suppliers you dealt with who could do the same? The consultant's letter is a good start. It could help in the future -- evidence that you weren't a non-performer, just that the company lost their will to pursue quality. And as I said before, I'd correspond with some HR types (like on the boards at workforce.com) and ask their free advice on handling the age issue if you think it might be a problem.

Any thoughts to trying a headhunter? I assume you're scouring the 'net job boards, the ASQ employment openings service, and the local job service.

Unfortunately, finding a job can be like a full-time job with no pay or bennies. But this is war, and you'll eventually prevail. Hopefully they were decent enough to offer a severance package.

Good luck, and let me/us know if I/we can help in any way.

 

[energy]

Severance

Mike S. said:

Energy,

Sounds like the consultant nailed it right. If it were truly a performance issue (on your part), and if the company were a decent one, you would have received a verbal warning and if necessary a written warning detailing the specifics of the "performance issue" prior to being shown the door. That's just customary for any kind of a decent company IMO even though you may be an "employment-at-will" state.

Is there anyone there higher-up the ladder who would give you a written recommendation/reference? Any customers/suppliers you dealt with who could do the same? The consultant's letter is a good start. It could help in the future -- evidence that you weren't a non-performer, just that the company lost their will to pursue quality. And as I said before, I'd correspond with some HR types (like on the boards at workforce.com) and ask their free advice on handling the age issue if you think it might be a problem.

Any thoughts to trying a headhunter? I assume you're scouring the 'net job boards, the ASQ employment openings service, and the local job service.

Unfortunately, finding a job can be like a full-time job with no pay or bennies. But this is war, and you'll eventually prevail. Hopefully they were decent enough to offer a severance package.

Good luck, and let me/us know if I/we can help in any way.

Mike S.,

I was paid right up to the moment I was harpooned. No more. I had a little over a week's vacation left. I got that. Right down to the the .01. And, now, I have a hearing next week for determination to see if I qualify for unemployment compensation. Company feels it's a perfromance issue and they shouldn't be charged for unemployment. Nice Guys! That's O.K. I have records showing who owed me what and when. I managed to keep a hardcopy, for whatever reason. It's titled "ISO Homework Assignments". By departments and names. Updated every week. Guess what? None of them report to me. They all report to the Grinch! Of course, I also have the Consultants e-mail (if I need it) to fortify my position, if it is said to be a performance issue. I would have to agree completely. You just got the wrong guy! **** em!

 

[tarheel]

Sue the B*******

With no severance, I would go for the age discrimation suit. When it happened to me, I threatened and received 6 additional weeks severance over and above what they offered. Especially if you have any documentation at all, you should have them right where you want them.

 

[energy]

Re: Sue the B*******

tarheel said:

With no severance, I would go for the age discrimation suit. When it happened to me, I threatened and received 6 additional weeks severance over and above what they offered. Especially if you have any documentation at all, you should have them right where you want them.

Tar

HMMMMMMM! The thought did cross my mind. They are hard to prove, but to sic the agencies on them would be nice. This is a Right to Work states, but you never know. I have a cousin who is an Attorney. I may just ask. maybe she'll take me Pro "BONO?" Thanks. Merry Christmas.

I'll be changing my user name soon. It's coined from the Company's name when we were friends. I have to check on the ramifications.

 

[Craig H.]

Hey, energy, who is the new guy that took over your picture!!??!

 

[Mike S.]

Wow! No severance! Saying they terminated you for poor performance! Nervy ba5tards, huh? What a bunch of slimes. Do they have any records of verbal and/or written warnings relating to this "poor performance" prior to the termination? If not, the unemployment folks should ask why the alleged performance issues were not documented. What did your last review or last several reviews look like -- were any performance issues noted there? If not, again they (the UI people) should ask why. If you don't have a copy of your review and they were good, ask the UI people to ask for them from the company. And I'd definitely use the note from the consultant -- a 3rd party view couldn't hurt. And your docs as to what they owed you but did not follow through on should help, too. Anything you have to support your position -- this is what they asked you to do, this is what you did, this is the lack of support, etc. Maybe sum it all up in a 1-2 page bullet point summary with the support docs referenced (showing your record-keeping and organizational skills like any good QM). Don't hold anything back -- this is war! And if you think it was age related, look into it. Good luck and keep us apprised of your progress.

 

[Mike S.]

One more thing Energy... Watch what you write here -- since they knew you post here they might be checking in to see what you're up to. Don't give 'em anything to use against you. But, some of your old posts might help to remind you of the whens and whats regarding their lack of support. Get 'em!

 

[energy]

The deck is stacked anyway!

Mike S.

They can look all they want. I will get my compensation. Anyway, read the following for a glimpse of winning a case of improper employer conduct in a Employment-AT-Will state, such as Connecticut:

In 'The Effect of the Employment-At-Will Rule on Employee Rights to Job Security and Fringe Benefits', Fordham Urban Law Journal, 1982, Volume X, number 1, pp. 1-71, Joseph DeGiuseppe discusses this issue revealingly. For example:

The overwhelming majority of jurisdictions continue to adhere to the view that employment relationships of an indefinite duration may be terminated at anytime without notice 'for good cause, for no cause, or even for cause morally wrong' [Payne v Western & Atl RR, 81 Tenn 507, 519-20 (1884)]

and:

The employment-at-will rule has withstood numerous challenges since its inception. Dismissals have been upheld under the at-will rule where employees have reported kickbacks, refused the REDACTED advances of their employer, refused to take a psychological stress test, filed workmen's compensation claims, indicated their availability for jury duty, refused to support political candidates favored by their employers, filed unemployment insurance claims, expressed concern about the safety of the employer's product, and filed complaints with government regulatory agencies concerning allegedly improper conduct by their employer. [more citations than I care to enter here, but at least one for each.] (AGE?)
as well as in the case of contracts unpaid or unenforceable because of fraud.

While it doesn't specifically mention age, this stuff is worse. Good grief.

Craig H. It's just ole ugly me. Our creator wasn't too kind to some of us, either!