Need Advice: Unethical Employer & Termination

[TheSutterDynasty]

Originally Posted by Yamer

I'm not sure about the release, I would have to dig it out. It does say "for financial reasons through no fault of his own" on my ROE.

I should be thankful that they did the decent thing and set me up well to receive EI, but it's difficult to be positive when you're still sitting unemployed with limited prospects and you're just surviving.

Sounds like I'm probably just boned on this one. Live and learn, I suppose.

While it doesn't sound like there's a lot of recourse for you (unfortunately), I'll jump on your side. This is a shady business move at best.

Having been through something somewhat similar it's very frustrating as an employee. Severance is great, but even getting 3 weeks per year you worked there doesn't seem all that helpful if job prospects are grim.

I feel like there needs to be more protection for employees. Again, severance is great, but in this case you were kicked to the curb just so they could hire their buddy? Maybe talking to an employment lawyer would open up another road for you to go with this but that's a pretty expensive can of worms.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty

While it doesn't sound like there's a lot of recourse for you (unfortunately), I'll jump on your side. This is a shady business move at best.

Having been through something somewhat similar it's very frustrating as an employee. Severance is great, but even getting 3 weeks per year you worked there doesn't seem all that helpful if job prospects are grim.

I feel like there needs to be more protection for employees. Again, severance is great, but in this case you were kicked to the curb just so they could hire their buddy? Maybe talking to an employment lawyer would open up another road for you to go with this but that's a pretty expensive can of worms.

I can reach out to the Central Alberta Community Legal Clinic and find a 30 minute consultation session free of charge.Outside of that, I can contact my original legal counsel from May and see what can be done. He has been great throughout this and really understands the situation.

Maybe it's worth just a few more free consultations with legal counsel?

Also, I think this will be addressed to my local MLAs. I've been vocal in supporting one, and I know both of them personally. May be worth a shot.

It means a lot that posters like yourself and Naga Waza get the human aspect of this and are willing to show support. Thanks.

[PepsiFree]

I have to ask: in a situation where you’re not looking for more severance or a job, what are you really trying to accomplish? It’s ####ty what happened to you (losing your job is never a positive experience, especially without cause), but can you take a step back from this and honestly say you’re doing this to protect others? Or is this just for you?

The only reason I ask is because, at the end of the day, the employer played by the rules. They may have not conducted themselves in a respectable way, but they still played by the rules. Can you honestly say you think a rampant enough problem that you feel responsible to protect others? Or are you in this to teach a lesson?

Some bridges are better left unburned, especially when it comes to business. Just make sure you’re doing things for the right reasons, and not just to make yourself feel better.

[Nage Waza]

They might not have 'played by the rules'. In fact, I would imagine investors would be pretty angry this was taking place.

The era of do nothing and just roll over is clearly over. I am not exactly sure what a good next step would be, but there have been a few good resources presented in this thread.

[Ace]

Likely the release you signed contains confidentiality clauses, so just be careful.

You might have been able to get 4-6 more weeks severance if they only paid you Alberta employment standards, but moot with the release you signed.

Also should point out that it’s possible the new position is actually different, just containing some of the similar tasks you use to do.

It does seem like a pretty good move to call the employer and ask for leads though. Certainly reminds them you still exist (maybe some subtle kicking there), but maybe they do actually have a good lead for you!

[Sliver]

What would a victory here even look like for you?

From the employer's perspective, you can quit at anytime, but they also have the right to terminate your employment at anytime as well. I think that's fair. It doesn't mean it sucks any less for you and I think anybody with a heart would be sympathetic to your position, but it would also be unfair to expect an employer to keep an employee in perpetuity if they didn't want to.

Just reading your post it is particularly easy to sympathize with your position. Obviously there is another side to this, though, and I don't know any business owner that takes terminating somebody lightly. It's awful to have to do (not as awful as being terminated, I'm sure), but ultimately when you're running a business sometimes you have to make crappy decisions that you view as ultimately better for the long-term vision of the company and better for the majority of the other employees. Maybe this was one of those cases...we can't know. It's probably fair to say if you were a star employee that everybody loved working with that management viewed as the next generation of leader in the organization you would still be there.

I do know if an employee terminated several months ago showed back up to cause a headache for me after I had done everything above board and with a view to easing their transition (laying off versus firing), my first thought would be 'glad I got rid of them' and my second thought would be 'fata him'.

There is nothing good that can come of revisiting this imo. Any goodwill you have with anybody over there will be torpedoed the second you make contact about this.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I have to ask: in a situation where you’re not looking for more severance or a job, what are you really trying to accomplish? It’s ####ty what happened to you (losing your job is never a positive experience, especially without cause), but can you take a step back from this and honestly say you’re doing this to protect others? Or is this just for you?

The only reason I ask is because, at the end of the day, the employer played by the rules. They may have not conducted themselves in a respectable way, but they still played by the rules. Can you honestly say you think a rampant enough problem that you feel responsible to protect others? Or are you in this to teach a lesson?

Some bridges are better left unburned, especially when it comes to business. Just make sure you’re doing things for the right reasons, and not just to make yourself feel better.

I'd echo this too. Many years ago, I also felt wronged by a lay-off, so I got an employment lawyer involved. Nothing changed for me or my situation and my severance got a big ding in it from the lawyers fee. Unless there is some really nefarious or illegal stuff going on in the background, I would leave it alone and move on to bigger and better things.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty

I feel like there needs to be more protection for employees. Again, severance is great, but in this case you were kicked to the curb just so they could hire their buddy?

They are allowed to do this. They owe you nothing except reasonable severance in lieu of notice.

People have some strange ideas about the nature of the relationship between an employer and their employees. You're exchanging your service or labour for money by mutual agreement that either party can end if they don't think it's worth the exchange anymore, for any reason. If you quit a job, do you feel a burden to keep working for them for free until they find a suitable replacement to fill your position? Of course not. So why on Earth would you think you're entitled to be paid to not work somewhere anymore?

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

So why on Earth would you think you're entitled to be paid to not work somewhere anymore?

Where did the OP or anyone else make this argument?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

They are allowed to do this. They owe you nothing except reasonable severance in lieu of notice.

People have some strange ideas about the nature of the relationship between an employer and their employees. You're exchanging your service or labour for money by mutual agreement that either party can end if they don't think it's worth the exchange anymore, for any reason. If you quit a job, do you feel a burden to keep working for them for free until they find a suitable replacement to fill your position? Of course not. So why on Earth would you think you're entitled to be paid to not work somewhere anymore?

They came up with a way that the Employee could collect UI that might be a bit on the sketchy side if I'm reading this correctly by creating a position with a different name on it.

So there's that, once the release was signed and the severance was accepted it kind of closed the book on it.

As some other members have said, unless you want to burn personal capital on this its not worth pursuing because I'm unsure of a positive end game. I'm sure this employer is willing to give a reference (as useless as those are now)

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

They came up with a way that the Employee could collect UI that might be a bit on the sketchy side if I'm reading this correctly by creating a position with a different name on it.

So there's that, once the release was signed and the severance was accepted it kind of closed the book on it.

Even if the position had the same name, they’d be in the clear. The exception to this would be if the role was unionized and there was verbiage in the collective agreement that spells out how long they must wait before re-hiring without offering the role back to the original person.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I have to ask: in a situation where you’re not looking for more severance or a job, what are you really trying to accomplish? It’s ####ty what happened to you (losing your job is never a positive experience, especially without cause), but can you take a step back from this and honestly say you’re doing this to protect others? Or is this just for you?

The only reason I ask is because, at the end of the day, the employer played by the rules. They may have not conducted themselves in a respectable way, but they still played by the rules. Can you honestly say you think a rampant enough problem that you feel responsible to protect others? Or are you in this to teach a lesson?

Some bridges are better left unburned, especially when it comes to business. Just make sure you’re doing things for the right reasons, and not just to make yourself feel better.

I've mulled the situation over in my mind for some time now. Should I, shouldn't I? What's to be gained? What's to be lost?

Most of all, it's the question you posed: am I doing this for the right reasons, and will this result in a better environment and organization than I left behind? I fully believe I would look into this for the right reasons. I'm certainly not the first one to receive this treatment there, and by any indication I will be far from the last.

After getting some great advice in this thread I now know what my rights and options are, which are sadly limited. And after sleeping on it with the new information and insights, I have to agree with the series of posts advising that it's not worth my time, energy, or overall capital. Even if I believe in my purpose and rationale, it's a real "pick your battle" life situation.

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

They are allowed to do this. They owe you nothing except reasonable severance in lieu of notice.

People have some strange ideas about the nature of the relationship between an employer and their employees. You're exchanging your service or labour for money by mutual agreement that either party can end if they don't think it's worth the exchange anymore, for any reason. If you quit a job, do you feel a burden to keep working for them for free until they find a suitable replacement to fill your position? Of course not. So why on Earth would you think you're entitled to be paid to not work somewhere anymore?

Although it would make things much, much easier at this juncture, I wasn't really looking for additional compensation. If this were about money I wouldn't have been working there in the first place. I just loved the job, and was good at it.

This is more about the fact that an employee seems to have less rights and protections than employers (unless you're unionized, of course). If I were to do something equally unethical while employed, the employer could terminate me on the spot.

Yes, what they did was perfectly legal, and they met obligations of employment standards in this situation. It's crappy and it stings, and it's put me in a personally difficult situation. They will never be held accountable for it, and they are free to continue doing this and many other unethical things.

I guess I don't know what the solution is, and I didn't fully know my options until I reached out the CP community. Now I know and I've re-assessed my position and future actions. Again, it still sucks and I think there is probably a better way to protect employees when something this blatant occurs, but there isn't.




Feel free to carry on with the thread discussing employment standards, etc. Might be an interesting conversation to have.

Thanks again to everyone. Appreciate it.

[Northendzone]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

They might not have 'played by the rules'. In fact, I would imagine investors would be pretty angry this was taking place.

The era of do nothing and just roll over is clearly over. I am not exactly sure what a good next step would be, but there have been a few good resources presented in this thread.

I could see investors being upset if we were taking hundreds of employees, but for a single employee?

[WCan_Kid]

Originally Posted by Yamer

I've mulled the situation over in my mind for some time now. Should I, shouldn't I? What's to be gained? What's to be lost?
...

It's not near as cheap or easy to get rid of employees as people think. Sure, a person can be let go at any time with proper severance and notice, but the employer still has a financial cost to consider, whereas you can simply walk away from a job legally with no consequences.
I'd wager far more employers are left to deal with the fallout of employees quitting with no reason or notice than there are people dealing with unfair terminations.
Replacing good employees with underqualified friends is a terrible business decision which keeps it from being a widespread problem. Definitely sucks for you, but would you want to be a part of an organization that makes those types of poor decisions anyway?

MOD edit: you don't need to quote the entire post.

[CaptainCrunch]

How do we know that the friend is underqualified?

Maybe the friend adds tremendous value.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

I could see investors being upset if we were taking hundreds of employees, but for a single employee?

While I imagine the opinions of individual investors will vary, overall there doesn’t seem to be much concern amongst investors regarding company ethics(or a lack thereof) when it comes to the treatment of employees when you consider how some publicly traded company’s operate.

[CaptainYooh]

Yamer, my advice to you from a long experience - let it go and don't waste your life on petty grievances. Unless you stand to lose contract money that you believe you've earned, it's not worth it, period. And based on your preamble, you don't. It will ONLY make you feel worse. Guaranteed. Move on.

There's one thing that I would suggest you do: call your former GM and in a friendly manner ask him directly if a) you could give his name as a reference and b) if you should worry about giving his name as a reference? Don't bring up the new hiring, don't question your lay-off, don't ask for explanations or reasons. Just secure a good reference. 9 out of 10, you will get it, if for no other reason than guilt feeling he may have over letting you go and free up space to hire a relative.

Best of luck to you.

[Sr. Mints]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

(. . .)

I'm unsure of a positive end game. I'm sure this employer is willing to give a reference (as useless as those are now)

I'm curious what you mean by this. Can you elaborate?

[WCan_Kid]

Originally Posted by Sr. Mints

I'm curious what you mean by this. Can you elaborate?

I always assume that any references put forward by a potential new hire are going to be friends of theirs and ,as an employer, all you can safely do is state that the person did work for you so there's no really insight to be gained through those references.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by WCan_Kid

It's not near as cheap or easy to get rid of employees as people think. Sure, a person can be let go at any time with proper severance and notice, but the employer still has a financial cost to consider, whereas you can simply walk away from a job legally with no consequences.
I'd wager far more employers are left to deal with the fallout of employees quitting with no reason or notice than there are people dealing with unfair terminations.

The reason why there’s probably more employers dealing with the fallout of employees quitting compared to workers dealing with wrongful dismissal is due to a few factors, the biggest one would be that there is recourse for one and not the other. I think it’s also reasonable to argue that the cost associated with workers quitting without notice are an assumed risk for employers. When an employer hires someone, they know the person they’ve hired may not work out, that’s why employers have things like probation period policies. So while there may be an impact from someone quitting randomly, the replacement costs have to be considered by any employer since they are the same as if an employee randomly quits. Life happens, employees don’t have defined availability that they can guarantee, your best employee who would never quit may become disabled or die and be unable to work. That’s not to excuse employees from not providing notice, just to demonstrate why as long as human beings are employed there will be risks associates with employing them that are outside of an employers control.

Replacing good employees with underqualified friends is a terrible business decision which keeps it from being a widespread problem. Definitely sucks for you, but would you want to be a part of an organization that makes those types of poor decisions anyway?

What are you basing it not being a widespread issue on? As captain pointed out as well, we don’t know whether or not this replacement was underqualified. There are no laws against workplace nepotism so I’m not sure assuming it isn’t much of issue based on a flawed theory makes much sense.

Also I’m sure in this economy the OP would have preferred to keep his job and make up his own mind about the employer as opposed to being essentially told they’re better off not working for an employer who treats them that way.