4 ms·

In my EU-centric worldview, the US system of at-will employment, and of two-week notices as the standard courtesy, is crazy. Three months is the typical notice

In my EU-centric worldview, the US system of at-will employment, and of two-week notices as the standard courtesy, is crazy. Three months is the typical notice period for tech workers and other highly-skilled jobs. One month is the legal minimum in Sweden, and certainly several other countries. Of course it goes both ways, in fact it's even more difficult for the employer to get rid of an employee. An employee doesn't need a reason to resign, an employer needs a valid reason to fire an employee, in addition to observing the notice period. To complete the picture, it's necessary to say that probation periods exist. Employees may be initially hired on probation (typical for fresh graduates), which has a shorter notice period, and either side may unilaterally decide not to continue past probation. That is, an employer unhappy with a probation employee doesn't need additional legal grounds to say "we're not proceeding with full employment after the probation period is over".

alistairSH 6y ago
In my EU-centric worldview, the US system of at-will employment, and of two-week notices as the standard courtesy, is crazy. Oh, I agree. But 3 months seems crazy to me. If I have an open position and it isn't filled in ~4-6 weeks, it often gets given to some other team (on the basis that if I really needed that position filled, I'd do so). I can't plan hiring over that timeframe. And when hiring employees in India, we've had them claim a 2-month resignation period, but they just end up using that time to find some other opportunity on the previous employer's time. It's a real mess.
- ACS_Solver 6y ago
  > Oh, I agree. But 3 months seems crazy to me. If I have an open position and it isn't filled in ~4-6 weeks, it often gets given to some other team (on the basis that if I really needed that position filled, I'd do so). I can't plan hiring over that timeframe. If you're in a culture (locality + industry) where a position can be filled in 4 weeks, that's one thing. If you're in a culture where every experienced person has 3 months of notice, then nobody would take your inability to fill a position within weeks to mean that you don't really need it. I have some experience with part-time contracting with US customers. Seeing how quickly people can join or leave there is certainly a culture shock!
  - foobiekr 6y ago
    Assuming that you’re talking about senior people, who are all employed, I don’t see how this helps. Realistically employee X resigns, and we find a replacement; that replacement is working and needs to resign. Their end dates are still serialized. We have a bunch of employees in Europe and everyone involved except the very marginal employees sees this situation as strongly negative (and, in fact, an argument to not hire in Europe at all).
    - Symbiote 6y ago
      Are those Europeans who don't value their rights fairly young? I don't need my 3 months now. They might be useful if my employer axes a whole department. They're useful for people with family commitments giving them less mobility.
      - foobiekr 6y ago
        The opposite. They are very senior.
- 2rsf 6y ago
  Since the same base rules apply for everyone this usually doesn't happen, plans are built accordingly and recruitments take into consideration those time scales.
- etripe 6y ago
  > But 3 months seems crazy to me. What you might not realise is that these three months would be the default legal position in case of disagreement. If you want to leave earlier and the employer agrees, you can usually leave earlier, too (with them being off the financial hook).
- anyfoo 6y ago
  I had a "to the next quarter" period in my last job, and when moving to the new job the deadline was missed, making the contract valid for a whole quarter. It wasn't a problem. I was on good terms with the previous company (I'm still getting invited to their anniversary parties and stuff like that), so there was no issue in working something out. Also, remember that ~6 weeks of vacation per year is common outside the US, so often it boils down to taking your remaining vacation. (Though I think you need to be careful with taxes and other regulations if the contracts overlap.)
tkgally 6y ago
I remember reading many years ago that employees in the U.S. have the right to quit at any time because being penalized for quitting would make the employment “involuntary servitude,” which is forbidden by the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I can’t find any confirmation of that explanation on the web now, though.
- garmaine 6y ago
  This is correct. If you don't have the right to quit at any time, you are legally a slave / indentured servant. And that is very, very illegal.
  - ghaff 6y ago
    The military is sort of a special case however. (And, of course, private employment contracts can make it financially onerous to break.)
    - garmaine 6y ago
      Interestingly the case can be made that the military is not exempt from the 13th amendment, which only makes one single exception for prisoners. It's just that the courts have ruled consistently that OBVIOUSLY the military wasn't meant to be included in the ban against involuntary servitude. Obviously. Just like they have also ruled that mandatory Jury duty is not in violation of the 13th amendment either. Funny how the system protects and perpetuates itself. But with respect to your point, I am nearly 100% sure that it is not the case that employers can use financial penalties to enforce such a contract. Anything you are paid as wages is pretty much untouchable after it is paid out, unless it was paid in mistake or you intentionally damaged the company or something. The best the company can do is withhold potential future earnings or bonuses, or take back conditional non-wage payments like bonuses within a certain window of time. This is part of why golden parachutes exist. Your contract has very generous severance clauses which award you lots of money if you follow a certain procedures for leaving, which involves advance notice and such. Fail to follow that and your paycheck just stops the day you walk off. So there are incentives, but they can't go after your already earned wages, paid or still due to you.
hvidgaard 6y ago
In reality, you can walk out of any job in EU as well. Unless you have some specific clauses in your contract, the worst they can do is simply not pay you anything. There may come a lawsuit after, but I doubt it. You can also get a doctors note and go on sick leave if you feel some serious stress on the job.
- ACS_Solver 6y ago
  It's true that they probably won't sue you for breach of contract, though they can, but if you just walk out of a job, you're at the risk of ruining your professional reputation, arguably the most precious resource. There aren't many other things that would be as much of a red flag when hiring as an employee that just decided to walk out of a job. Of course if you have good reasons to stop working, there are good options. If it's stress or similar mental health issues, you can resign and spend your notice period on sick leave. If your employer assaults you or just stops paying, or otherwise grossly neglects their duties as an employer, you're legally entitled to quit immediately.
- benhurmarcel 6y ago
  Typically a company owes you money when you leave, like the started part of the month, pending holidays, and the annual bonus/extra pay that you already earned. If you don't respect your notice period they'll remove your salary over the missed time from that final payment. So in that case they'd remove 3-month salary. Sometimes it goes into the negative, and some companies actually send a bill, but there's basically no consequence for ignoring it. Usually companies don't push the matter.
Mauricebranagh 6y ago
I agree (I am from the UK) when first saw US professional workers complaining about > two weeks my first thought was wow you must have a really low status job.
- foobiekr 6y ago
  Not too long ago a friend witnessed the SVP GM of an $5b a year division quit with two weeks notice. I’m senior enough that I give at least a month, often more, and this made me realize that I’ve been perhaps overly generous.

alistairSH 6y ago

In my EU-centric worldview, the US system of at-will employment, and of two-week notices as the standard courtesy, is crazy. Oh, I agree. But 3 months seems crazy to me. If I have an open position and it isn't filled in ~4-6 weeks, it often gets given to some other team (on the basis that if I really needed that position filled, I'd do so). I can't plan hiring over that timeframe. And when hiring employees in India, we've had them claim a 2-month resignation period, but they just end up using that time to find some other opportunity on the previous employer's time. It's a real mess.

ACS_Solver 6y ago
> Oh, I agree. But 3 months seems crazy to me. If I have an open position and it isn't filled in ~4-6 weeks, it often gets given to some other team (on the basis that if I really needed that position filled, I'd do so). I can't plan hiring over that timeframe. If you're in a culture (locality + industry) where a position can be filled in 4 weeks, that's one thing. If you're in a culture where every experienced person has 3 months of notice, then nobody would take your inability to fill a position within weeks to mean that you don't really need it. I have some experience with part-time contracting with US customers. Seeing how quickly people can join or leave there is certainly a culture shock!
- foobiekr 6y ago
  Assuming that you’re talking about senior people, who are all employed, I don’t see how this helps. Realistically employee X resigns, and we find a replacement; that replacement is working and needs to resign. Their end dates are still serialized. We have a bunch of employees in Europe and everyone involved except the very marginal employees sees this situation as strongly negative (and, in fact, an argument to not hire in Europe at all).
  - Symbiote 6y ago
    Are those Europeans who don't value their rights fairly young? I don't need my 3 months now. They might be useful if my employer axes a whole department. They're useful for people with family commitments giving them less mobility.
    - foobiekr 6y ago
      The opposite. They are very senior.
2rsf 6y ago
Since the same base rules apply for everyone this usually doesn't happen, plans are built accordingly and recruitments take into consideration those time scales.
etripe 6y ago
> But 3 months seems crazy to me. What you might not realise is that these three months would be the default legal position in case of disagreement. If you want to leave earlier and the employer agrees, you can usually leave earlier, too (with them being off the financial hook).
anyfoo 6y ago
I had a "to the next quarter" period in my last job, and when moving to the new job the deadline was missed, making the contract valid for a whole quarter. It wasn't a problem. I was on good terms with the previous company (I'm still getting invited to their anniversary parties and stuff like that), so there was no issue in working something out. Also, remember that ~6 weeks of vacation per year is common outside the US, so often it boils down to taking your remaining vacation. (Though I think you need to be careful with taxes and other regulations if the contracts overlap.)

tkgally 6y ago

I remember reading many years ago that employees in the U.S. have the right to quit at any time because being penalized for quitting would make the employment “involuntary servitude,” which is forbidden by the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I can’t find any confirmation of that explanation on the web now, though.

garmaine 6y ago
This is correct. If you don't have the right to quit at any time, you are legally a slave / indentured servant. And that is very, very illegal.
- ghaff 6y ago
  The military is sort of a special case however. (And, of course, private employment contracts can make it financially onerous to break.)
  - garmaine 6y ago
    Interestingly the case can be made that the military is not exempt from the 13th amendment, which only makes one single exception for prisoners. It's just that the courts have ruled consistently that OBVIOUSLY the military wasn't meant to be included in the ban against involuntary servitude. Obviously. Just like they have also ruled that mandatory Jury duty is not in violation of the 13th amendment either. Funny how the system protects and perpetuates itself. But with respect to your point, I am nearly 100% sure that it is not the case that employers can use financial penalties to enforce such a contract. Anything you are paid as wages is pretty much untouchable after it is paid out, unless it was paid in mistake or you intentionally damaged the company or something. The best the company can do is withhold potential future earnings or bonuses, or take back conditional non-wage payments like bonuses within a certain window of time. This is part of why golden parachutes exist. Your contract has very generous severance clauses which award you lots of money if you follow a certain procedures for leaving, which involves advance notice and such. Fail to follow that and your paycheck just stops the day you walk off. So there are incentives, but they can't go after your already earned wages, paid or still due to you.

hvidgaard 6y ago

In reality, you can walk out of any job in EU as well. Unless you have some specific clauses in your contract, the worst they can do is simply not pay you anything. There may come a lawsuit after, but I doubt it. You can also get a doctors note and go on sick leave if you feel some serious stress on the job.

ACS_Solver 6y ago
It's true that they probably won't sue you for breach of contract, though they can, but if you just walk out of a job, you're at the risk of ruining your professional reputation, arguably the most precious resource. There aren't many other things that would be as much of a red flag when hiring as an employee that just decided to walk out of a job. Of course if you have good reasons to stop working, there are good options. If it's stress or similar mental health issues, you can resign and spend your notice period on sick leave. If your employer assaults you or just stops paying, or otherwise grossly neglects their duties as an employer, you're legally entitled to quit immediately.
benhurmarcel 6y ago
Typically a company owes you money when you leave, like the started part of the month, pending holidays, and the annual bonus/extra pay that you already earned. If you don't respect your notice period they'll remove your salary over the missed time from that final payment. So in that case they'd remove 3-month salary. Sometimes it goes into the negative, and some companies actually send a bill, but there's basically no consequence for ignoring it. Usually companies don't push the matter.

Mauricebranagh 6y ago

I agree (I am from the UK) when first saw US professional workers complaining about > two weeks my first thought was wow you must have a really low status job.

foobiekr 6y ago
Not too long ago a friend witnessed the SVP GM of an $5b a year division quit with two weeks notice. I’m senior enough that I give at least a month, often more, and this made me realize that I’ve been perhaps overly generous.