7 ms·

> Up and quitting (hopefully with notice) Why is it considered bad form to quit without notice, but if a company lets you go without notice, it's "just busines

> Up and quitting (hopefully with notice) Why is it considered bad form to quit without notice, but if a company lets you go without notice, it's "just business"?

hn_throwaway_99 8y ago
At least in the tech world, if a company just let you go with no severance I think it would rightfully be branded a very shitty thing to do.
- lovich 8y ago
  Welcome to 95% of the tech world. I don't know anyone whose been laid off and was offered even a month of severance. It appears very common in San Francisco but the rest of the world acts like most businesses
  - aikinai 8y ago
    Severance is extremely common outside Silicon Valley and even outside of tech. Even people in (skilled) factory jobs usually get severance when laid off. It's mainly a hedge against getting sued rather than goodness of heart, but it's still common.
    - lovich 8y ago
      I would like to see evidence if that. I've seen companies offer a single paycheck,two weeks that is, of pay and act like they were ghandi for it. They also usually ask for you to sign all the NDAs and other agreements they forgot to get you to sign, in exchange for that severance
    - jpatokal 8y ago
      More than that, severance is the law in the vast majority of the world. Being fired without notice and without severance, losing your health insurance and having to fight for unemployment in court is a trifecta of unthinkable for the average European.
      - lovich 8y ago
        Yea, I should have specified this was the US only. I will say though, this is not the "vast majority of the world". South America, Africa, and Asia certainly don't have the same protections as Europe and they hold the vast majority of the population
      - Xylakant 8y ago
        Severance is not in the law in germany. Notice periods are, but there are some substantial differences. You can’t take on a job after having received or handed in your notice - you’re in principle still expected to work. If you just decide to not show up, that’d grounds for immediate termination. Both sides can agree by contract to terminate the employment immediately (Aufhebungsvertrag) and those contracts often stipulate a severance, but for example they also often stipulate that any wages from jobs you take on in that period get deducted from the severance payment.
        jpatokal 8y ago
        Severance applies when the company lays you off. If you're fired for cause (say, not showing up), you're rarely entitled to anything.
        Xylakant 8y ago
        In germany, severance is uncommon, even if the company lays you off. You get your three month notice, and after that, no further payment is made. Things may differ if the situation is slightly complicated, for example the company would prefer you gone earlier, they may offer you a payment lower than the wage for the notice period and you’re gone earlier or if they might not be allowed to terminate your employment for legal reasons to avoid lengthy lawsuits. Sometimes severance payments are negotiated in mass layoffs in unionized companies. My point was: severance differs substantially from a notice period. If you’re laid off with severance, you can go and get a different job the next day. If you’re laid off with a notice period you cannot. You must show up and work the next day. If you don’t, you’ll be terminated without notice. A common thing that people do is that they call in sick after either being served or handing in their notice - same thing happens. Immediate termination.
  - taneq 8y ago
    Is this 'laid off' in the individual (or even team) sense or 'laid off' in the 'company went bankrupt' sense? I'd guess your exposure to the latter would be significantly higher in startup land than in the real world.
    - lovich 8y ago
      The first. Most of the people I know who were laid off get, at best, an vague promise to blnot fight unemployment claims and even those aren't always honored. Other than California most states allow NDAs and non competes which companies rely on heavily to threaten employees if they fought a lay off at all
      - austhrow743 8y ago
        >an vague promise to blnot fight unemployment claims How does unemployment work where you are? Why would a previous employer be involved in the process of you claiming unemployment? The only thing I can think of, and also why they would be inclined to fight it, is if the payments come out of their pocket. If that's the case, then isn't that sort of just severance but with a different name slapped on it?
        ghaff 8y ago
        My understanding is that employers in the US pay for unemployment insurance and their rates go up if the number of claims go up. So they don't pay directly but they do indirectly.
        lovich 8y ago
        They pay unemployment insurance to the state, which goes up if they have more claims from ex employees. The government gives them the chance to contest any unemployment claims. You can also get in a limbo where you accept an offer from employer A, give notice to your current employer B, then employer A rescinds the job offer from you before you start or even early in employment. The state then considers you not having been employed with employer A and having quit voluntarily from employer B, so they deny unemployment payments
  - beagle3 8y ago
    Not “rest of the world”, rest of the US. In Europe and e.g. Israel, minimal severance is dictated by law and its often 3-months pay or more, in some cases a months salary for each year worked (so laying someone off after 20 years means they get 20 months severance). There are exceptions (e.g. firing “for cause” such as sexual misconduct or embezzelment) but they are really exceptional. And if the company folds and can’t pay that, the government will, and likely criminally indict the officers who let the company fold without taking care of the severance payment.
    - scandox 8y ago
      Minor quibble: a lot of businesses go bust unable to pay redundancy and there are very rarely consequences for directors unless reckless trading can be proven. That at least is my experience in Ireland and UK.
      - beagle3 8y ago
        I am most familiar with the situation in Israel with respect to layoffs; not paying severance in Israel is criminal whether or not the company folds (with officers actually indicted), and it’s 1-month per year of employment, with social security underwriting this payment. As a result of this strict lawful requirement, there’s an industry of regulated escrow middlemen who collect 8.33% of monthly salary from employer on behalf of severance. If employee is terminated for cause, employer may get it back. In all other cases (including going bust), it goes to the employee.
    - Xylakant 8y ago
      In Germany the minimum notice period is 4 weeks and increases in steps (after 2 years it’s a full month, after 5 years it’s two and tops out at 7 month after 20 years of continued employment). Since germany can’t go below European minimums, that’s an upper bar for those. It’s fairly l common to see 3 month as a minimum though. Keep in mind, however, that during that time you’re employed and expected to work, though the employer may decide that you don’t have to show up (common in security critical employments). You still can’t take another job. If you don’t show up against the employers will, that’s cause for immediate termination with no severance. Severance payments are still uncommon. If a company folds, notice periods are capped at three month, and no, officers will not be indicted for any future failed payment. Officers may be indicted for delaying the an Insolvenz, failing to pay taxes or social security or embezzling money in the process, but costs for future wages are not on the list. There is something called Insolvenzgeld which may pay for some of the wages, but it’s capped to 5400 EUR/month and covers the outstanding wage payments for the three month _before_ the company was declared insolvent. However, the whole social security system makes loosing or quitting a job less of an hardship. Even though quitting a job yourself now means that you’re not receiving unemployment payments for the first three months, you’ll still be covered after that, lowering the overall risk.
  - Markoff 8y ago
    well i was offered two weeks after two years of work (China), though according law it should be two months (month for each year you worked), out of maybe 30 people, me and i think one Israeli girl were the only ones who didn't accept it, then i followed great examples of my role models from Fight Club and American beauty and bumped my severance to two months with promise i will keep my mouth shut and i don't need to come anymore for next two weeks we were supposed, i don't need to keep bridges with such shitty companies
noobermin 8y ago
Because one side has power and the other doesn't.
maccard 8y ago
In the US. plenty of places have legal requirements for notice and severance.
mnm1 8y ago
Because we are taught that way by company propaganda. It really isn't a big deal and often, leaving without notice is the right thing to do. Companies in the US have no respect or care for their employees, yet they push this idea that we must respect and care for them. Fuck them if their usefulness has come to an end. Not to mention that often, when you do give notice, they'll fire you simply to avoid paying you the final two weeks. We need to stop buying into this stupid bullshit corporate propaganda and eradicate it out of our culture to make progress.
- jstarfish 8y ago
  I agree with you, but-- > Not to mention that often, when you do give notice, they'll fire you simply to avoid paying you the final two weeks This makes no sense. Companies will make your life hell and do anything to get you to quit so they don't have to fire you. If they fire you without cause, you can make an unemployment claim against them-- but if you quit on your own, that's on you. In my experience, it's more common that they'll enact your resignation immediately yet continue paying you as though you were working the next two weeks, to mitigate any final acts of sabotage or exfiltration.
  - maxsilver 8y ago
    > In my experience, it's more common that they'll enact your resignation immediately yet continue paying you In my experience, it's not uncommon that they'll enact your resignation immediately, and that's it. No wages, no pay, you resigned, so goodbye. > This makes no sense. (snip) If they fire you without cause, you can make an unemployment claim against them Companies are not necessarily rational actors, they are wholly controlled by people who can sometimes be just as rash or impulsive as any other person. Especially at smaller companies, pure spite can have a non-trivial amount of play in the hiring/firing/resigning process. And what is the employee really going to do, file for unemployment? The employee already has a new job (that's why they resigned in the first place), so it's a pretty safe gamble they aren't going though that hassle, just for the two week gap. --- If the company falls on hard times and lays people off, that's "just business" and "no hard feelings". But if an employee leaves for a different job, that's a minor betrayal, and gets treated as such. This response is not appropriate, but I've seen it often enough to know it happens.
spacehome 8y ago
The flip side to notice is not notice, but severance pay. Who cares if you're not required to go into work every day but the paycheck keeps rolling in?
tboyd47 8y ago
When you get let go, neither you nor the people who depend on you at work know that it's coming. When you quit, you know it's coming and they don't. The two week notice gives them time to get the info they need from you. It's not really for the company, it's for your colleagues. If no one depends on you then it doesn't matter.

> Up and quitting (hopefully with notice) Why is it considered bad form to quit without notice, but if a company lets you go without notice, it's "just business"?

hn_throwaway_99 8y ago

At least in the tech world, if a company just let you go with no severance I think it would rightfully be branded a very shitty thing to do.

lovich 8y ago
Welcome to 95% of the tech world. I don't know anyone whose been laid off and was offered even a month of severance. It appears very common in San Francisco but the rest of the world acts like most businesses
- aikinai 8y ago
  Severance is extremely common outside Silicon Valley and even outside of tech. Even people in (skilled) factory jobs usually get severance when laid off. It's mainly a hedge against getting sued rather than goodness of heart, but it's still common.
  - lovich 8y ago
    I would like to see evidence if that. I've seen companies offer a single paycheck,two weeks that is, of pay and act like they were ghandi for it. They also usually ask for you to sign all the NDAs and other agreements they forgot to get you to sign, in exchange for that severance
  - jpatokal 8y ago
    More than that, severance is the law in the vast majority of the world. Being fired without notice and without severance, losing your health insurance and having to fight for unemployment in court is a trifecta of unthinkable for the average European.
    - lovich 8y ago
      Yea, I should have specified this was the US only. I will say though, this is not the "vast majority of the world". South America, Africa, and Asia certainly don't have the same protections as Europe and they hold the vast majority of the population
    - Xylakant 8y ago
      Severance is not in the law in germany. Notice periods are, but there are some substantial differences. You can’t take on a job after having received or handed in your notice - you’re in principle still expected to work. If you just decide to not show up, that’d grounds for immediate termination. Both sides can agree by contract to terminate the employment immediately (Aufhebungsvertrag) and those contracts often stipulate a severance, but for example they also often stipulate that any wages from jobs you take on in that period get deducted from the severance payment.
      - jpatokal 8y ago
        Severance applies when the company lays you off. If you're fired for cause (say, not showing up), you're rarely entitled to anything.
        Xylakant 8y ago
        In germany, severance is uncommon, even if the company lays you off. You get your three month notice, and after that, no further payment is made. Things may differ if the situation is slightly complicated, for example the company would prefer you gone earlier, they may offer you a payment lower than the wage for the notice period and you’re gone earlier or if they might not be allowed to terminate your employment for legal reasons to avoid lengthy lawsuits. Sometimes severance payments are negotiated in mass layoffs in unionized companies. My point was: severance differs substantially from a notice period. If you’re laid off with severance, you can go and get a different job the next day. If you’re laid off with a notice period you cannot. You must show up and work the next day. If you don’t, you’ll be terminated without notice. A common thing that people do is that they call in sick after either being served or handing in their notice - same thing happens. Immediate termination.
- taneq 8y ago
  Is this 'laid off' in the individual (or even team) sense or 'laid off' in the 'company went bankrupt' sense? I'd guess your exposure to the latter would be significantly higher in startup land than in the real world.
  - lovich 8y ago
    The first. Most of the people I know who were laid off get, at best, an vague promise to blnot fight unemployment claims and even those aren't always honored. Other than California most states allow NDAs and non competes which companies rely on heavily to threaten employees if they fought a lay off at all
    - austhrow743 8y ago
      >an vague promise to blnot fight unemployment claims How does unemployment work where you are? Why would a previous employer be involved in the process of you claiming unemployment? The only thing I can think of, and also why they would be inclined to fight it, is if the payments come out of their pocket. If that's the case, then isn't that sort of just severance but with a different name slapped on it?
      - ghaff 8y ago
        My understanding is that employers in the US pay for unemployment insurance and their rates go up if the number of claims go up. So they don't pay directly but they do indirectly.
      - lovich 8y ago
        They pay unemployment insurance to the state, which goes up if they have more claims from ex employees. The government gives them the chance to contest any unemployment claims. You can also get in a limbo where you accept an offer from employer A, give notice to your current employer B, then employer A rescinds the job offer from you before you start or even early in employment. The state then considers you not having been employed with employer A and having quit voluntarily from employer B, so they deny unemployment payments
- beagle3 8y ago
  Not “rest of the world”, rest of the US. In Europe and e.g. Israel, minimal severance is dictated by law and its often 3-months pay or more, in some cases a months salary for each year worked (so laying someone off after 20 years means they get 20 months severance). There are exceptions (e.g. firing “for cause” such as sexual misconduct or embezzelment) but they are really exceptional. And if the company folds and can’t pay that, the government will, and likely criminally indict the officers who let the company fold without taking care of the severance payment.
  - scandox 8y ago
    Minor quibble: a lot of businesses go bust unable to pay redundancy and there are very rarely consequences for directors unless reckless trading can be proven. That at least is my experience in Ireland and UK.
    - beagle3 8y ago
      I am most familiar with the situation in Israel with respect to layoffs; not paying severance in Israel is criminal whether or not the company folds (with officers actually indicted), and it’s 1-month per year of employment, with social security underwriting this payment. As a result of this strict lawful requirement, there’s an industry of regulated escrow middlemen who collect 8.33% of monthly salary from employer on behalf of severance. If employee is terminated for cause, employer may get it back. In all other cases (including going bust), it goes to the employee.
  - Xylakant 8y ago
    In Germany the minimum notice period is 4 weeks and increases in steps (after 2 years it’s a full month, after 5 years it’s two and tops out at 7 month after 20 years of continued employment). Since germany can’t go below European minimums, that’s an upper bar for those. It’s fairly l common to see 3 month as a minimum though. Keep in mind, however, that during that time you’re employed and expected to work, though the employer may decide that you don’t have to show up (common in security critical employments). You still can’t take another job. If you don’t show up against the employers will, that’s cause for immediate termination with no severance. Severance payments are still uncommon. If a company folds, notice periods are capped at three month, and no, officers will not be indicted for any future failed payment. Officers may be indicted for delaying the an Insolvenz, failing to pay taxes or social security or embezzling money in the process, but costs for future wages are not on the list. There is something called Insolvenzgeld which may pay for some of the wages, but it’s capped to 5400 EUR/month and covers the outstanding wage payments for the three month _before_ the company was declared insolvent. However, the whole social security system makes loosing or quitting a job less of an hardship. Even though quitting a job yourself now means that you’re not receiving unemployment payments for the first three months, you’ll still be covered after that, lowering the overall risk.
- Markoff 8y ago
  well i was offered two weeks after two years of work (China), though according law it should be two months (month for each year you worked), out of maybe 30 people, me and i think one Israeli girl were the only ones who didn't accept it, then i followed great examples of my role models from Fight Club and American beauty and bumped my severance to two months with promise i will keep my mouth shut and i don't need to come anymore for next two weeks we were supposed, i don't need to keep bridges with such shitty companies

noobermin 8y ago

Because one side has power and the other doesn't.

maccard 8y ago

In the US. plenty of places have legal requirements for notice and severance.

mnm1 8y ago

Because we are taught that way by company propaganda. It really isn't a big deal and often, leaving without notice is the right thing to do. Companies in the US have no respect or care for their employees, yet they push this idea that we must respect and care for them. Fuck them if their usefulness has come to an end. Not to mention that often, when you do give notice, they'll fire you simply to avoid paying you the final two weeks. We need to stop buying into this stupid bullshit corporate propaganda and eradicate it out of our culture to make progress.

jstarfish 8y ago
I agree with you, but-- > Not to mention that often, when you do give notice, they'll fire you simply to avoid paying you the final two weeks This makes no sense. Companies will make your life hell and do anything to get you to quit so they don't have to fire you. If they fire you without cause, you can make an unemployment claim against them-- but if you quit on your own, that's on you. In my experience, it's more common that they'll enact your resignation immediately yet continue paying you as though you were working the next two weeks, to mitigate any final acts of sabotage or exfiltration.
- maxsilver 8y ago
  > In my experience, it's more common that they'll enact your resignation immediately yet continue paying you In my experience, it's not uncommon that they'll enact your resignation immediately, and that's it. No wages, no pay, you resigned, so goodbye. > This makes no sense. (snip) If they fire you without cause, you can make an unemployment claim against them Companies are not necessarily rational actors, they are wholly controlled by people who can sometimes be just as rash or impulsive as any other person. Especially at smaller companies, pure spite can have a non-trivial amount of play in the hiring/firing/resigning process. And what is the employee really going to do, file for unemployment? The employee already has a new job (that's why they resigned in the first place), so it's a pretty safe gamble they aren't going though that hassle, just for the two week gap. --- If the company falls on hard times and lays people off, that's "just business" and "no hard feelings". But if an employee leaves for a different job, that's a minor betrayal, and gets treated as such. This response is not appropriate, but I've seen it often enough to know it happens.

spacehome 8y ago

The flip side to notice is not notice, but severance pay. Who cares if you're not required to go into work every day but the paycheck keeps rolling in?

tboyd47 8y ago

When you get let go, neither you nor the people who depend on you at work know that it's coming. When you quit, you know it's coming and they don't. The two week notice gives them time to get the info they need from you. It's not really for the company, it's for your colleagues. If no one depends on you then it doesn't matter.