My friend is a customer service rep who is ready to retire. Her company is talking about layoffs with 13+ weeks of severance, but when she asked (anonymously) if they were accepting volunteers, they said no. In case she’s not one of the ones told to clean out her desk, what are the ways she could get terminated while preserving her ability to claim unemployment (which would equal the 13 weeks of severance)?

UPDATE: She took my advice and saw her doctor. He agreed that she’s experiencing a job-related stress injury, set her up with a Disability claim, and referred her for psychiatric counseling.

  • iHUNTcriminals@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Does lemmy have an unethical life pro tips community yet? You’d probably get better results if we did.

    • Pons_Aelius@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Funny thing is I see nothing unethical in this request. Companies have no ethics that are not enforced by laws, so it is not unethical for employees to adopt the same behaviour.

    • Drusas@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I really don’t think there’s anything unethical about this. They’re going to be laying people off anyway; they may as well lay off someone it will hurt less.

  • Shadow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Ask for a raise. Tell them there’s no retirement plans because of inflation now, and she can see herself staying there another 10 years.

    They might not lay her off because they know she’ll retire soon anyways. Increase her cost of employment so it’s no longer cost effective to just wait it out.

  • dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Assuming this is in the US, be sure of your state’s unemployment laws. A lot of states say you are ineligible for unemployment if you are fired for cause, like attendance issues or failure to perform work duties.

    • LilB0kChoy@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s important to note that, barring something egregious, single instances don’t meet the with cause definition.

      There has to be documented history that the issue was raised with you and addressed (verbal warnings, write ups etc.)

        • LilB0kChoy@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          No, it doesn’t. A single occurrence of being late, or the first instance of being talked to about job performance does not meet the requirement of cause to deny you unemployment benefits.

          An employer has to demonstrate repeated occurrences with documentation to be able to justify denying unemployment. Without that they can contest your claim but as soon as you appeal it they will be overruled unless they can show a repeated pattern with corrective action documentation.

          • Usul_00_@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            This varies by location. I’ve been through it on both sides in a few states, and when working with an employment lawyer one of the most crucial things he said was to make sure the filing was in the beneficial state.

  • Froyn@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Easy. Email everyone in the company how much she makes.
    Start an email chain about wages.
    Open the handbook and start using/abusing the loopholes while pointing them out.

    And most importantly; do as little as possible while maintaining the job requirements as laid out in the listing.

      • cooopsspace@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        It’s not in Australia either but it definitely happens. Seen it personally. Nobody will become a union representative if they’ve seen the last 3 not have their contract renewed for unknown reasons.

      • roofuskit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        That’s the goal here though. If she wants to collect unemployment getting fired without cause is the plan.

      • Froyn@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        I thought the idea was to “get severance”. Which would be "it’s cheaper to pay severance than permit them to continue disturbing the workplace. Sounds like you’re trying to advocate doing something illegal.