4 ms·

In the U.S., we have 'at-will employment' laws. So, unless you're caught stealing, engaging in racial or sexual discrimination or harassment, doing drugs, or co

In the U.S., we have 'at-will employment' laws. So, unless you're caught stealing, engaging in racial or sexual discrimination or harassment, doing drugs, or committing some felonious criminal offense (though even then those last two cases it is still arguable), you can be fired without just cause and without warning, and any court will dismiss any standing claims against the employer. Thus, if you're told you're not a 'culture fit', that's actually more than most companies need to tell you when they boot you out the door.

michaelochurch 13y ago
At-will employment: very complicated. http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2012/12/21/what-is-at-will-employment/ http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2012/12/21/what-is-at-wi... Laws on termination are very complex in general. You need a lawyer to navigate that stuff. There are a lot of things that it's illegal to fire someone for doing (including, for example, discussing salary with co-workers). If you're under threat of a PIP/firing you can usually make one apply in the 30-90 days of the PIP. More than a lawsuit, companies fear disparagement (unless their reputations are in the toilet already) and that's a good enough reason, in general, to write decent severance packages. Warning: never explicitly threat disparagement in a severance negotiation. That gets into extortion territory and while you're unlikely to be taken to jail, you've lost all leverage. Generally, you should aim for a fair (not unreasonably high) severance and more important try to work out a good reference even when let go. Always, after any termination, check your own references. Employment suits become he-said/she-said affairs very quickly, so the behavior of the people involved will determine a lot. If they're giving good references, reasonable severance offers, etc. then the odds are very strongly in their favor. If they give a bad reference, the situation is much to your advantage and your argument that you were fired 2 days after disclosing migraines suddenly finds a more receptive audience.
rayiner 13y ago
(Obligatory disclaimer: this isn't legal advice, I'm not your lawyer, etc): It doesn't quite work like that. You can fire someone for any reason at all, as long as it isn't one of the disallowed reasons (discrimination on the basis race, gender, religion, age, etc). However, the reason you give need not be taken at face value. A jury is entitled to conclude that your stated reason is pretextual, and a discriminatory reason is the real one. There's an evidentiary showing the plaintiff must meet first, but it can be purely circumstantial and pretext is often what the claim really boils down to. That's where shit like "he's not a cultural fit" can get you into trouble. It's basically begging the jury (or a judge at summary judgment) to disbelieve you and conclude that you really fired someone for a discriminatory reason. I.e. "he's not a cultural fit... because he's black and we're all white" or "she's not a cultural fit... because she's a woman and we're all men." A sibling comment to yours recasts "culture" to "process and management structure." That's much more firm ground. "He's ineffective at his job because he can't work well with our internal processes" or "she's ineffective at her job because she doesn't take direction from our management." Also, this isn't just a legal issue. Talking about "process and management structure," which is specific and grounded in the ultimate question of whether someone is doing a good job, instead of culture, which is amorphous and can encompass things that have nothing to do with the work, focuses your thinking on factors that you should actually care about.
smacktoward 13y ago
One reason people form unions is to get a contract with their employer that sets up a grievance process so that you can't be fired because your manager got up on the wrong side of the bed this morning. Just sayin'.

michaelochurch 13y ago

At-will employment: very complicated. http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2012/12/21/what-is-at-will-employment/ http://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2012/12/21/what-is-at-wi... Laws on termination are very complex in general. You need a lawyer to navigate that stuff. There are a lot of things that it's illegal to fire someone for doing (including, for example, discussing salary with co-workers). If you're under threat of a PIP/firing you can usually make one apply in the 30-90 days of the PIP. More than a lawsuit, companies fear disparagement (unless their reputations are in the toilet already) and that's a good enough reason, in general, to write decent severance packages. Warning: never explicitly threat disparagement in a severance negotiation. That gets into extortion territory and while you're unlikely to be taken to jail, you've lost all leverage. Generally, you should aim for a fair (not unreasonably high) severance and more important try to work out a good reference even when let go. Always, after any termination, check your own references. Employment suits become he-said/she-said affairs very quickly, so the behavior of the people involved will determine a lot. If they're giving good references, reasonable severance offers, etc. then the odds are very strongly in their favor. If they give a bad reference, the situation is much to your advantage and your argument that you were fired 2 days after disclosing migraines suddenly finds a more receptive audience.

rayiner 13y ago

(Obligatory disclaimer: this isn't legal advice, I'm not your lawyer, etc): It doesn't quite work like that. You can fire someone for any reason at all, as long as it isn't one of the disallowed reasons (discrimination on the basis race, gender, religion, age, etc). However, the reason you give need not be taken at face value. A jury is entitled to conclude that your stated reason is pretextual, and a discriminatory reason is the real one. There's an evidentiary showing the plaintiff must meet first, but it can be purely circumstantial and pretext is often what the claim really boils down to. That's where shit like "he's not a cultural fit" can get you into trouble. It's basically begging the jury (or a judge at summary judgment) to disbelieve you and conclude that you really fired someone for a discriminatory reason. I.e. "he's not a cultural fit... because he's black and we're all white" or "she's not a cultural fit... because she's a woman and we're all men." A sibling comment to yours recasts "culture" to "process and management structure." That's much more firm ground. "He's ineffective at his job because he can't work well with our internal processes" or "she's ineffective at her job because she doesn't take direction from our management." Also, this isn't just a legal issue. Talking about "process and management structure," which is specific and grounded in the ultimate question of whether someone is doing a good job, instead of culture, which is amorphous and can encompass things that have nothing to do with the work, focuses your thinking on factors that you should actually care about.

smacktoward 13y ago

One reason people form unions is to get a contract with their employer that sets up a grievance process so that you can't be fired because your manager got up on the wrong side of the bed this morning. Just sayin'.