7 ms·

What's the difference between being fired and laid off?

Dobbs 10y ago
Being fired generally means you did something wrong wrong. Laid off means the company is getting rid of people to reduce costs or due to removing the position, for example due to change of strategy. One generally implies personal fault, the other implies side-effect of business.
rezashirazian 10y ago
You are laid off when the company is downsizing, has no need for your services or cannot pay your wages. You get fired when you fail to perform adequately at your job.
joatmon-snoo 10y ago
Technically none, but "fired" tends to refer specifically to when there was some specific employee conduct, e.g. failure to fulfill responsibilities, which forced the company to let the employee go. "Laid off" is a broader term that doesn't carry the same negative connotation and is more appropriate when, say, a company is strapped for cash and lets go of someone to free up money in the budget.
tehwalrus 10y ago
In the UK, "getting fired" or "getting the sack" means you were incompetent (or commited misconduct) and are sent home. For incompentance, they can only do this after a "performance review" (they have to give you 3 months to improve, I think). "Laid off" is called being "made redundant". The company can do this much more easily to a bunch of people, but it generally has to pay them ~6 months salary and can't hire new people at the same time, for the same job(s). Any employer being more aggressive than this will probably be taken to an employment tribunal. In the States, I've heard you guys use the terms synonymously, but it always sounded a little weird. Your employment law is awful for employees though, by comparison.
- kelnos 10y ago
  No, we use the terms the same way in the US, just the protections behind them are weaker (and personally, as an employee, I'm fine with it that way). You might be thinking of the phrase "was let go", which is just a nicer way of saying "got fired". "Laid off" here means the same as in the UK: you were sent home because your job function isn't needed anymore, or because the company is downsizing.
  - vertex-four 10y ago
    > and personally, as an employee, I'm fine with it that way You mean as a reasonably well-off employee who was lucky enough to have picked a growing field when you went to uni. On the other hand, if that field ever stops growing for any reason... you might see why people enjoy stability and the ability to plan ahead in their work life.
    - philh 10y ago
      Some people think that pro-employee laws are not in fact good for employees. Regardless of whether or not you agree with them, it's super uncharitable to dismiss them in this way.
      - vertex-four 10y ago
        Pro-employee laws are not good for employees in the success case - that you're a top 10% worker in a field that is growing and has lots of demand. The thing is, if you think about the failure case - you're a disposable cog in a field that's stagnating - there's issues which need to be solved, unless you're a staunch libertarian with a belief that people who are unable to find work should die. Nobody wants to pay for a 40yo person with a family to spend years retraining when they lose their job and can't find another, so what is there to do?
        tbrownaw 10y ago
        The alternative to making it impossible to fire people, is to make getting fired less of a big deal. Instead of adding friction to the employment market, implement a decent social safety net that includes provisions for voc ed / retraining. Instead of focusing solely on prevention, work on mitigation. To much prevention can make everything grind to a halt.
jomamaxx 10y ago
Fired - you did something wrong, incompetent (or pissed someone off) and they are doing it specifically to you. Laid off - your group is redundant or discontinued, they have no need for you or your team/product, they're closing an overseas business unit, or culling 10% of their staff. You're in the wrong boat at the wrong time. It has different connotations.
wcummings 10y ago
If you're laid off, you can collect unemployment more easily.
- nannal 10y ago
  immediately vs 3 months waiting period as far as I recall
  - ToPutItBluntly 10y ago
    For California, that is wrong. You can claim right away if you are fired. The employer can dispute it however they have to prove they tried to rectify the situation. The way the system works, the former employee has to dispute the unemployment rejection if the employer wants to try to claim it was a valid firing. So if you do get fired and there was not a pattern of behavior or something that you were warned about, then you simply appeal, state your case and the judge will almost certainly reject the employers false claim. Unfortunately, I know this by experience. I was fired for some fishy business and it was obvious at the hearing. So always file for unemployment unless you are certain it will not be granted. Unemployment also qualifies you for health insurance through Covered California.

Dobbs 10y ago

Being fired generally means you did something wrong wrong. Laid off means the company is getting rid of people to reduce costs or due to removing the position, for example due to change of strategy. One generally implies personal fault, the other implies side-effect of business.

rezashirazian 10y ago

You are laid off when the company is downsizing, has no need for your services or cannot pay your wages. You get fired when you fail to perform adequately at your job.

joatmon-snoo 10y ago

Technically none, but "fired" tends to refer specifically to when there was some specific employee conduct, e.g. failure to fulfill responsibilities, which forced the company to let the employee go. "Laid off" is a broader term that doesn't carry the same negative connotation and is more appropriate when, say, a company is strapped for cash and lets go of someone to free up money in the budget.

tehwalrus 10y ago

In the UK, "getting fired" or "getting the sack" means you were incompetent (or commited misconduct) and are sent home. For incompentance, they can only do this after a "performance review" (they have to give you 3 months to improve, I think). "Laid off" is called being "made redundant". The company can do this much more easily to a bunch of people, but it generally has to pay them ~6 months salary and can't hire new people at the same time, for the same job(s). Any employer being more aggressive than this will probably be taken to an employment tribunal. In the States, I've heard you guys use the terms synonymously, but it always sounded a little weird. Your employment law is awful for employees though, by comparison.

kelnos 10y ago
No, we use the terms the same way in the US, just the protections behind them are weaker (and personally, as an employee, I'm fine with it that way). You might be thinking of the phrase "was let go", which is just a nicer way of saying "got fired". "Laid off" here means the same as in the UK: you were sent home because your job function isn't needed anymore, or because the company is downsizing.
- vertex-four 10y ago
  > and personally, as an employee, I'm fine with it that way You mean as a reasonably well-off employee who was lucky enough to have picked a growing field when you went to uni. On the other hand, if that field ever stops growing for any reason... you might see why people enjoy stability and the ability to plan ahead in their work life.
  - philh 10y ago
    Some people think that pro-employee laws are not in fact good for employees. Regardless of whether or not you agree with them, it's super uncharitable to dismiss them in this way.
    - vertex-four 10y ago
      Pro-employee laws are not good for employees in the success case - that you're a top 10% worker in a field that is growing and has lots of demand. The thing is, if you think about the failure case - you're a disposable cog in a field that's stagnating - there's issues which need to be solved, unless you're a staunch libertarian with a belief that people who are unable to find work should die. Nobody wants to pay for a 40yo person with a family to spend years retraining when they lose their job and can't find another, so what is there to do?
      - tbrownaw 10y ago
        The alternative to making it impossible to fire people, is to make getting fired less of a big deal. Instead of adding friction to the employment market, implement a decent social safety net that includes provisions for voc ed / retraining. Instead of focusing solely on prevention, work on mitigation. To much prevention can make everything grind to a halt.

jomamaxx 10y ago

Fired - you did something wrong, incompetent (or pissed someone off) and they are doing it specifically to you. Laid off - your group is redundant or discontinued, they have no need for you or your team/product, they're closing an overseas business unit, or culling 10% of their staff. You're in the wrong boat at the wrong time. It has different connotations.

wcummings 10y ago

If you're laid off, you can collect unemployment more easily.

nannal 10y ago
immediately vs 3 months waiting period as far as I recall
- ToPutItBluntly 10y ago
  For California, that is wrong. You can claim right away if you are fired. The employer can dispute it however they have to prove they tried to rectify the situation. The way the system works, the former employee has to dispute the unemployment rejection if the employer wants to try to claim it was a valid firing. So if you do get fired and there was not a pattern of behavior or something that you were warned about, then you simply appeal, state your case and the judge will almost certainly reject the employers false claim. Unfortunately, I know this by experience. I was fired for some fishy business and it was obvious at the hearing. So always file for unemployment unless you are certain it will not be granted. Unemployment also qualifies you for health insurance through Covered California.