3 ms·

Sure, insofar as you're defining the term as "you're no longer employed here." But that definition is not really all that helpful, and is equivalent to saying t

Sure, insofar as you're defining the term as "you're no longer employed here." But that definition is not really all that helpful, and is equivalent to saying that you're fired because you quit, also. There's absolutely a difference in widespread RIFs/layoffs and firing an employee, both in terms of how that individual is treated by future potential employers as well as the eyes of the law.

nemo44x 4y ago
There’s voluntary termination and involuntary termination. Within involuntary there’s terminated for cause and terminated without cause. Laid off people are terminated without cause but are fired none the less because they are involuntarily dismissed (terminated) from a job. It’s not an official or legal term. It’s informal. But we’ve come up with other terms to make people feel better or not wound their pride or something. But the result is the same - you’ve been fired.
- colinmorelli 4y ago
  On an individual basis, sure. But this is not what we're talking about. This is a mass layoff, which absolutely does have special legal treatment. Sure, you can call it a mass firing if you'd prefer, and I suppose you'd be equally "correct," but then it's not clear what the goal of that clarification is besides making these people feel worse about the situation. Everyone knows what a layoff is. Nobody is confused, thinking that it was the employee's choice. We call it a layoff because it absolves the employee from fault in fewer words than "involuntary termination without cause." If, however, you're suggesting that there is in fact no difference between individual involuntary termination without cause and a mass involuntary termination without cause, then the WARN act in CA is just one such counterexample, and very clearly treats "plant closing or mass layoff" as a specific event, separate from other types of involuntary termination without cause.

nemo44x 4y ago

There’s voluntary termination and involuntary termination. Within involuntary there’s terminated for cause and terminated without cause. Laid off people are terminated without cause but are fired none the less because they are involuntarily dismissed (terminated) from a job. It’s not an official or legal term. It’s informal. But we’ve come up with other terms to make people feel better or not wound their pride or something. But the result is the same - you’ve been fired.

colinmorelli 4y ago
On an individual basis, sure. But this is not what we're talking about. This is a mass layoff, which absolutely does have special legal treatment. Sure, you can call it a mass firing if you'd prefer, and I suppose you'd be equally "correct," but then it's not clear what the goal of that clarification is besides making these people feel worse about the situation. Everyone knows what a layoff is. Nobody is confused, thinking that it was the employee's choice. We call it a layoff because it absolves the employee from fault in fewer words than "involuntary termination without cause." If, however, you're suggesting that there is in fact no difference between individual involuntary termination without cause and a mass involuntary termination without cause, then the WARN act in CA is just one such counterexample, and very clearly treats "plant closing or mass layoff" as a specific event, separate from other types of involuntary termination without cause.