Late, bad attitude cook
You don't have to fire him, he walked off. So no fire, no unemployment to collect. It was a voluntary resignation on his part. Either way it falls out, it is still a no brainer.
Edited by cheflayne - 8/22/15 at 7:18pm
Areed. So the prima donna quit of his own volition cuz you decided you weren't gonna
spoil him like his previous did. Why should you, and to expect you to was naive on his part.
Doesn't matter if he claims he didn't quit anyway; he had two warnings then he walked out
on his shift. He's memorex. California's an "at will" state anyways, so pay him what you owe
him and find a cook who wants to work.
I have confidence you'll get the kinks out, just may take a little time. From what I can see,
you had a nice following, so it's all good.
Did you go over the handbook in detail, or was it just signed as part of the hiring process. I'm guessing he was hired by the previous
owner. If the handbook was signed and the cook disregarded/broke the rules and the old chef let it happen without documentation or discipline then the signed handbook is pretty much void. Technically speaking.
Did you use the verbal warning to sit and explain what you expect of him?
I also didn't see anything about his skills. Was he a good cook? If somebody is used to doing something regularly, whether right or wrong, it becomes the status quo.
I don't know, this guy could be a total F up, but I do know that people can change and be taught new ways.
Looks like he has a wife and kids.
I had the unfortunate challenge you described happen to me when I worked for Marriott.
Marriott got a contract for a college food service for a bid over another company.
Contract included having to accept the last companies employees.
I was morning Sous and had to evaluate everyone.
I had a middle age woman working salad bar that would not conform and I had to go through the documentation process and all that went with it.
When I had to fire her she couldn't understand why as she had been there 25 years doing the same job she'd always done and never heard a word from any manage about her work.
Doesn't matter if they are in an "at will" state, he can still file for unemployment and if he gets it the business gets the hit. Only because I work for a large company and have to deal with our HR "professionals" a lot, I would say that, if you wanted to protect yourself from unemployment, you'd have a battle on your hands-not enough progressive discipline, did you make it clear to him that he you weren't going to send him home as punishment, etc. That being said, if I didn't have to deal with my HR department this guy would be gone, regardless if unemployment.
Jacks, keep in mind that some replies may not be directly to you. Some experienced members sometime post to kind of inform others of something
that may pertain to the issue.
For instance, an Employment-at-will State usually does not require any reason to terminate any employee at any time. My State is one. Things change when there are rules
in place like in employee hands book or posted. If an employee is breaking a written rule, it usually requires the employer to have the total documentation. It's weird, but it's almost
better not to have a handbook in those states.
Most employees that want to collect will usually claim discrimination. This usually requires employer time. It could be race, gender, sex, age, disability, their origin or birthplace, religion etc.
there tends to be a bit of gray areas in all those. So the employer still has to react.
Workers Compensation claims are rapidly growing with regards to stress related injury. Employees are winning more and more of this type of case. The employee only has to prove that the business was 51% of the cause. A lot of ambulance chaser are going after that. This results in higher cost for Workers Compensation,and monies from those who don't carry. My State is screwy, they require Workers Compensation but it is on a voluntary basic. So basically many don't carry it. Most of my employees fall under the
2003-1 class. That has gone up to $3.74 with never having a claim.
It was scenarios exactly like that helped me to make my decision to place "former" before the title of owner on my resume. :~)
In CA if an employee quits then they do not get unemployment. If you fire them, they do get unemployment. All the documentation in the world will not change that. I fired a guy for stealing from me, he got unemployment despite my protests and contesting it to the ends of the earth.
I would file with the EDD explaining the view that he walked off shift, a "voluntary abandonment of employment" . It might fly, it might not. I have used it to my advantage in the past, but either way the guy needs to be toast. Life is too short to be held hostage by arrogant attitudes and non-compliance.
I agree, I certainly don't want to come off as an advocate for second chance, rehabilitation or nonobservance. I'm certain that I have terminated more employees then I have hired.
I just try to stay disciplined and terminate proficiently rather than emotionally.
There are times when it's worth considering an employees personal issues, and working with them as best one can. And then there are times when it's clear that the are hopeless.
Of course the problem with not firing, like lets say he continues to throw the rules in your face, walk out when he's
not happy, and expect to sign in the next day....problem is they're setting a pattern you may never break,
it affects others as well as your business, and before you know it they're threatening sewage...er, I mean sue-age.
And I admit I'm out of date on unemployment......my last experience with it, they didn't simply base it on your current
job--they went back several quarters, so in this case it would be based on his previous employer. If say you happened
to not be working during the qualifying quarter, then you didn't qualify, period. Does anyone know if it's still that way
Yeah, your probably gonna get fried for that, at least he wasnt employed with you very long, if he thinks you will give him a good reference you might be alright though.
For an eight hour shift, an employee is entitled to 2 (10 minute each) paid breaks, so in effect an employee works 7 hours and 40 minutes, yet gets paid for 8 hours. I don't believe they have to show on the time card because they are paid breaks, but I am not sure about. The breaks are actually one break for every 4hours worked and they are supposed to be as close to the middle of the 4 hour shift as is possible.
WAIT A MINUTE! Don't try to read anything into it. You have enough evidence for your actions. The unemployment dept. will not waste any time with this. You might receive a call. Just be stern and explain his release. It will end right there. I don't know about your state, but most states only recognize business with 25 or more employees.
Give him everything he is asking for within reason, and quickly.
Then move on. Don't waste another minute on it. If something happens, then something happens. You can't worry about it.
Most people listen to friends and acquaintances on these type of things. 9 times out of ten they don't have a clue.
The worst case scenario is unemploy. calls you to a hearing. Just hire an attorney, pay him $ 200. and you'll never hear anything. This situation would require less time than a traffic ticket.
From Panini....."For instance, an Employment-at-will State usually does not require any reason to terminate any employee at any time. My State is one."
I believe that this holds true for any employer any where in the USA not just employment at will states.
No employer anywhere is obligated to give reason to terminate an employee.at any time.
If you delve into the nitty gritty of the federal employment rules that hang by the punch clocks at work, you'll find this to be true.
Large and small corporations create their employee hand books to coincide with these rules to that end, and set up the documentation and discipline areas to protect themselves against possible lawsuits.
I was referencing to getting unemployment benefits if someone is fired. That is left up to each state not the feds. Even in a at-will state the employer will usually have
to provide UnEm. with some factual information if an employee applies after being terminated for some sort of misconduct or other offence. Here, having a wittiness is about
the only thing that carries weight for immediate decision at a hearing.
Agreed, you can terminate for any reason. But you will be challenged if it has to do with what I mentioned above. gender, sex, age, disability, their origin or birthplace, religion etc.