[jacksrestaurant]

So this cook I have has been more than a half an hour late twice already. First time was a verbal warning as stated in our employee handbook that everyone had to sign upon hiring. Second time a close friend who was a child got shot so I had a soft heart and gave him a second verbal. Today he's an hour late and I'm pissed so I write him up. He's upset cuz under the previous owner he never got called out or reprimanded on anything so he says I'll sign my write up and go home. I said are you sure? He said yes then left. I'm firing him tomorrow, this is a no brainer right?

 

[brianshaw]

Right.

 

[cheflayne]

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.

 

[meezenplaz]

You don't have to fire him, he walked off. So no fire, no unemployment to collect. It was a voluntary quit on his part. Either way it falls out, it is still a no brainer.

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. /img/vbsmilies/smilies/smile.gif

 

[jacksrestaurant]

Thanks for the input everyone. As a matter of fact he just sent me a text...saying his wife go an unexpected call into work so he can't work tomorrow because he can't find a babysitter. A couple of the old cooks are great, one is his younger brother who is the stand out one, but yah this guy pulled stuff like this all the time with the old owner and just walked a over him. Welcome to the real world buddy

 

[panini]

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.

Just sayin

 

[chefross]

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.

OY!!!

 

[pete]

. California's an "at will" state anyways, so pay him what you owe

him and find a cook who wants to 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.

 

[jacksrestaurant]

He has only been on my payroll since June 1st, I'd imagine he won't get much?

 

[jacksrestaurant]

I never said anything about sending him home. He even said 'if you were going to send me home I would have been like, oh well, a Saturday off.' As if he wanted me to. That's the kind of arrogant attitude that is guy has. He has never been disciplined and I told them all from the start because I was aware of these behaviors before that it wasn't gonna fly under my ownership. He tested me and I followed through

 

[panini]

[h5]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[/h5]
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.

 

[cheflayne]

This results in higher cost for Workers Compensation.... 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. :~)

I never said anything about sending him home.

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.

 

[brianshaw]

All of that is true (panini' post) but none of that should be incentive to retain employees who aren't performing. If I were the OP i'd fire for cause if he dared return and not think twice.

 

[panini]

All of that is true (panini' post) but none of that should be incentive to retain employees who aren't performing. If I were the OP i'd fire for cause if he dared return and not think twice.

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.

 

[brianshaw]

Indeed.


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.

 

[meezenplaz]

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 

in Calif? 

 

[jacksrestaurant]

So this guy came in and got his final check, thanked me for the time he was here, Yada yada. He requested copies of his time cards. Anyone know if I have to provide this to him? I read somewhere that he must provide a written request and then I have 30 days to provide it but I'm not sure what state that at was for and I know some states don't have to provide this. Anyone familiar with this?

 

[cheflayne]

21 days, request can be verbal

 

[jacksrestaurant]

OK thanks. He took breaks every day within 6 hours of his 8 hour shifts but he never wrote them on the time card so it just shows on paper straight 8 hours.....I'm gonna pay for that I'm thinking

 

[ready freddy]

OK thanks. He took breaks every day within 6 hours of his 8 hour shifts but he never wrote them on the time card so it just shows on paper straight 8 hours.....I'm gonna pay for that I'm thinking

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.