Hello, I am new to these forums, and "formerly" employed in the State of Florida.

I was recently terminated from my position.

But to go back a month or so, basically it snowballed since about early June, I had been working for a govt establishment for over 2 years. My employer had been putting more and more on my plate, that I simply couldn't handle, though I was doing it to the best of my ability, I just wasn't up to finishing certain tasks in a timely fashion, at least according to my supervisor.

So, to make this brief, it falls under the category of unsatisfactory performance.

Push came to shove, and yesterday, the Dept Head calls me in on the carpet with my immediate supevisor, and then the manager...altogether, with little ol me.


Something NEW came across the board during this meeting, that I had been insubordinate on SEVERAL occasions, and I had this "What?" look on my face, and questioned it, because in the policy manual it states

"Refusal to do a task given to an employee" or "Abusive langauge to an employer"

He proceeds to tell me, "Well, insubordination means that if you FAIL to complete a task given to you by your supervisor, that is considered insubordination."

I was thinking "Balogne!!" Basically either, he does not know the policy OR he is lying.

He proceeds to tell me of a choice that I can make.

Either 1. Resign
2. Continue on a probationary period (of which he said that he does not have faith in me to change anyways

I gave him my decision...number 2...why? Because I will NOT get unemployment for quitting (that's usually the case)

So I made a statement to my immediate supervisor that I intend on staying until they decide to release me, then she makes me aware, " You know, you will loose all vacation and sick time, and this can be a bad mark on your career record (a bluff attempt obviously)

I said I was aware of that...then I go back to the Dept head, and gave him a written statement, saying I chose to stay until the City decides to terminate me...he took it, signed it, and I went on my way.

Then I get called in by the manager, he said "I did the figuring of your vacation leave and sick leave, and want to make you aware that you'll be forfeiting X amount of dollars (I already did the math, UC will be more beneficial to me)

Okay, I left his office, nuff said,...later on....I get a call from the HR Director, telling me the SAME THING (they seemed to be pushing me quitting for some reason, why, because they don't want to have to pay UC obviously)

So she's giving me this song in dance, "I'm calling you up personally to tell you not to act in haste on this decision, because you will know what this mean...yadda yadda yadda..etc." And it will mean no chance of rehire (yeah, like I want to work for them again)

I said, I stand by my decision. Then she tells me that she will be forwarding my file to the Unemployment Office (the file with all my "write ups" and the like, most of which include details that demonstrate unsat performance)

I even called my UC Office, even THEY told me. "Whatever you do, DO NOT QUIT, LET THEM TERMINATE YOU!" (sorry for too many caps).

So I could understand the "push" to have me resign. (Voluntary termination, right?)

So...now my concern, remember I brought up the issue of insubordination? Well, they could use this for the appeals process for UC, so they can get out of paying me UC.

My leverage is this

"The Department head TOLD me in a closed door meeting, that insubordination means the failure to complete a task, he even said, 'you can see that in the policy manual'"

The ironic thing is, I later looked it up in thet policy manual and it said REFUSAL (key word there) REFUSAL to do the work, meaning if you out right refuse to do it.

I do have the copy of the policy stating this, thats my proof. But I need the proof that he SAID it.

So that's it,

Question is....will I win??

Thank you, I am really lucky I found this site (Well google helped)

Our crystal ball is out being recalibrated. We have no idea whether you will win or not.

The definition of insubordination is not the issue. Nor is whether he actually said it or not. Your unemployment claim will not stand or fall based on that.

What matters with unemployment is whether or not you lost your job through no fault of your own. In many cases, a quit-or-be-fired option is considered being fired (and thus eligible for unemployment) not matter which option you select.

It's going to come down to who is more creditable at any hearing.

Our crystal ball is out being recalibrated. We have no idea whether you will win or not.

The definition of insubordination is not the issue. Nor is whether he actually said it or not. Your unemployment claim will not stand or fall based on that.

What matters with unemployment is whether or not you lost your job through no fault of your own. In many cases, a quit-or-be-fired option is considered being fired (and thus eligible for unemployment) not matter which option you select.

It's going to come down to who is more creditable at any hearing.

Thank you, the quick response is appreciated, Mr Moderator :)

That's something new, the quite or be fired option is considered being fired...didn't hear of that, of course, I wonder if that "Quite or be fired" option applies to Florida Law though.

Florida is "not so great place to work" if you want any kind of employee rights. It's the "We're doing you a favor by working for us" state. :-)

Now, how can one make themselves more creditable at a hearing?

Thank you for your info

It's Ms. Moderator ;)

I don't know of any state where quit-or-be-fired is not considered an involuntary term. Unless the reason they want you out in the first place is one that would disqualify you for benefits, I would expect you to be able to collect. If your employer contests benefits then the burden of proof is on your employer to prove that you were fired for a disqualifying reason, not yours to prove you were not.

But nothing with regards to UI is carved in stone in any case. I've seen claims approved for employees who were drunk on duty and claims denied for employees who missed time due to illness. There's no way to make any guarantees.

I will concur will cbg. However, it is difficult to speculate on what will happen if/when you file until we know the exact circumstances that lead to your separation.

But having represented a number of employers in hearings before the Commission, I can confidently state that an ultimatum to quit or be fire will ber determined as a discharge, thereby putting the burden of proof upon the employer to demonstrate willful and deliberate misconduct connected to the work. The eemployer's definition of insubordination does not meet the generally legally accepted definition and I seriously doubt will constitute misconduct as defined by law. Refusing to complete the task may meet the definition and thus constitute misconduct, but attempting to complete, but failing to do so despite your best efforts will satisfy neither in the Commission's opinion.

My advice is to continue to give your best effort and be an absolute angel in the workplace. Also, keep any and all relevant documents that you think may be useful in an unemployment hearing that appears to be in your future.

RJC -

Thank you for the info. Yes, I have done things to the best of my ability, it doing my tasks when asked to, if I hadn't gotten to it in time, or started the task already, but not yet finished it.....to my supervisor...it might as well be insubordination....perhaps it's being taken personal, I have no idea. There really was no pleasing her.

The organization does have a history of starting off an employee, and then putting more and more on their plate...granted some employers are understanding of that, and not hassle them about "You haven't gotten it done yet??"

Some employers, thank the Lord, are "Well, you can just finish it tomorrow." and that's that. I had been loyal, determined, and steadfast in my position.

Anyways, as far as documentation....would personal handwritten logs....in Mr. Franklin Covey organizer....be sufficient, because that is what I am doing.

I would write

ie - July 11th - Dept Head stated that insubordination is defined as failure to complete a task as assigned by his/her supervisor, upon looking up definition in the Employee Handbook, it stated "Refusal to do the task".

Does making a personal log be sufficient in a hearing?


However, this "Right to work" state I live in, the employer can pretty much change the rules when it's convenient to them.

Ie - "Well, the policy says, he needs to exceed 3 days sick time in order to provide a Doctor's note, when I only was sick for one day, and they are still asking for a note.

My boss told me, "Unless otherwise stated by management" So I suppose management supercedes policy?

What's the use in having a policy manual if you're not going to go by the book.

Now, I'm in a City position, the STATE govt goes by the book.




I will concur will cbg. However, it is difficult to speculate on what will happen if/when you file until we know the exact circumstances that lead to your separation.

But having represented a number of employers in hearings before the Commission, I can confidently state that an ultimatum to quit or be fire will ber determined as a discharge, thereby putting the burden of proof upon the employer to demonstrate willful and deliberate misconduct connected to the work. The eemployer's definition of insubordination does not meet the generally legally accepted definition and I seriously doubt will constitute misconduct as defined by law. Refusing to complete the task may meet the definition and thus constitute misconduct, but attempting to complete, but failing to do so despite your best efforts will satisfy neither in the Commission's opinion.

My advice is to continue to give your best effort and be an absolute angel in the workplace. Also, keep any and all relevant documents that you think may be useful in an unemployment hearing that appears to be in your future.

A personal log will be helpful if only to recollect dates, times and particularly significant matters. It will certainly make you sound more knowledgeable and more prepared to the Agency and/or Referee.

As an FYI, right to work refers to whether or not you can be required to join a union. I think you meant "at will" state?

Although a handbook can certainly be interpreted and/or changed per management's discretion, it may actually have some force and effect in an unemployment matter. If you can demonstrate that the employer has a policy, but then fails to follow it, then the Agency and/or Referee will most certainly look disfavorably upon the employer.

As an aside, by chance are you a union member?

As I stated before. I am sure the company is being told by the Legal dept that they can do this. I would think, if they wanted to force you to leave, that they would just "Discharge" you and not care so much about having to pay Unemployment compensation. It seems that they want to leave you with "Nothing". Almost like they are trying to "Punish" you for some reason.
It sounds as though you are still employed with this company. If I were you I would be happy to leave and move on. I would never be able to function in any capasity under all the stress you seem to be under. I am sure you need the income, however no job is worth damaging your health over. If you don't have your health, you will not be able to work anywhere. Good luck.

No I am not a union member, nor do we have a union (though, someone tried to get a union established in our organization, but too many "No" votes...makes me wonder why someone pushed to get a union with the city)

So, it's a "Right to work" and yes it is an "At will" state. I just know the HR Director tried to talk me out...(sorry if I'm repeating myself) ...talk me out of letting THEM terminate me, instead have me resign....which I chose not to do. And now, she mentioned to me, that she is sending my personel file and paperwork to the Unemployment office...because now..since I did not resign, they are terminating me "for cause" as she puts it...and I am supposing she wants the UE office to know this.

I wanted to ask you as a side note.....I hear of a lot of situations, when it comes to hearings, most of the time the employer is a no show or something occurs on the employers side, and the former employee wins the case...typically by default most times.

My father had a situation with the State, they gave him a hard time, he didn't leave on good terms, at least according to them, he shows up to the hearing, they don't...he wins.


A personal log will be helpful if only to recollect dates, times and particularly significant matters. It will certainly make you sound more knowledgeable and more prepared to the Agency and/or Referee.

As an FYI, right to work refers to whether or not you can be required to join a union. I think you meant "at will" state?

Although a handbook can certainly be interpreted and/or changed per management's discretion, it may actually have some force and effect in an unemployment matter. If you can demonstrate that the employer has a policy, but then fails to follow it, then the Agency and/or Referee will most certainly look disfavorably upon the employer.

As an aside, by chance are you a union member?

Again, I am still confused ... were you in fact discharged or do you still work there? :confused:

In any event, the employer will be contacted by the Agency once you file a claim for unemployment. At that point they can and should provide the Agency with all pertinent and relevant information regarding your separation. The Agency will only consider relevant and timely information.

After a determination is rendered, the aggrieved party can appeal. In your case (and apparently your father's), if you are found eligible, then the employer can appeal (thereafter called the appellant). If the appellant fails to show at the hearing, then the hearing is dismissed for lack of prosecution and the original determination stands.

Your thread is confusing. I thought you said you didn't work there any more. Then I thought you said you are still there, but the company is in the process of terminating you for "Cause".. Which is it?? Anyway, one option that possibly never entered your mind is the following: As long as you don't hand in a formal written resignation, they the company can't say you resigned. Your option is, instead of waiting for them to terminate you (they will probably fight the unemploymeny anyway). Just walk out, quit on the spot. Then you can collect "Unemployment". An additional waiting period is required if you walk out, but at least you can still collect. I would not stay at a company and put up with daily abuse and ridicule. I couldn't function like that. Stop playing games with this company, that is what they want you to do...

As long as you don't hand in a formal written resignation, they the company can't say you resigned. Your option is, instead of waiting for them to terminate you (they will probably fight the unemploymeny anyway). Just walk out, quit on the spot. Then you can collect "Unemployment". ...

Um, no. :rolleyes:

A formal, written resignation is not required for a voluntary termination. What do you think walking out and quitting on the spot is? It's a resignation. Neither would I be optimistic that you'd get unemployment benefits if you resigned, walked out, quit, whatever you want to call it. In most states, if you voluntarily terminated your employment, you would have to show that, based on the standards of a "reasonable person", the working conditions were so intolerable that you had no choice but to quit.

As long as you don't hand in a formal written resignation, they the company can't say you resigned. Your option is, instead of waiting for them to terminate you (they will probably fight the unemploymeny anyway). Just walk out, quit on the spot. Then you can collect "Unemployment". An additional waiting period is required if you walk out, but at least you can still collect. I would not stay at a company and put up with daily abuse and ridicule. I couldn't function like that. Stop playing games with this company, that is what they want you to do...

Very poor advice. :eek:

Outside of being let go for a reduction in force there is no separation that permits absolute eligibility for unemployment. In fact, "walking out" as suggested, would likely be the death knell of any chance to collect. A written resignation based on the reasons you provided, ie untenable working conditions, has a much better chance of permitting you to collect.

Please do not heed the quoted advice.

Very poor advice. :eek:

Outside of being let go for a reduction in force there is no separation that permits absolute eligibility for unemployment. In fact, "walking out" as suggested, would likely be the death knell of any chance to collect. A written resignation based on the reasons you provided, ie untenable working conditions, has a much better chance of permitting you to collect.

Please do not heed the quoted advice.


Okay....to clarify...I am not currently working there, I was terminated. But here's an UPDATE.....I had written an exit letter, basically explaining my unpleasant experience and certain situations....with the organization to be put in my file.

I started it off as "This letter is to serve as my exit letter" this was AFTER they terminated me

But, to my suprise....I received an envelop from my organization (return request receipt)....I opened it up....and guess what..suprise!! It's a copy of my "exit" letter....and the Organization NOW says that I resigned (citing that THAT letter was my resignation letter, when obviously is was NOT)

No where in the letter it states that "I quit" or "I resign"

So now it looks like the situation has changed, NOW the arguement is...."He quit, no I was fired"

Looks like their grabbing at straws here. Talk about a mess, they can't get their stuff together.

If the letter was properly written, then you should not have a problem demonstrating that this was an involuntary separation. However, the company has made clear that they will pursue this as such.

Do you have anything in writing (email, memo, etc.) that indicates that you were discharged or at the very least that you had been given an ultimatum as previously stated?

If the letter was properly written, then you should not have a problem demonstrating that this was an involuntary separation. However, the company has made clear that they will pursue this as such.

Do you have anything in writing (email, memo, etc.) that indicates that you were discharged or at the very least that you had been given an ultimatum as previously stated?

Heck, we had a closed door meeting with ME, the Dept Head, the Manager, and my immediate supervisor on this ultimatum. Though I wasn't given anything in writing, it was a verbal.

Actually, when I made my decision of wether I decided to resign OR be dismissed, I went to my manager about my decision...he said to write something up stating in writing my decision, and to go with him to the Dept. Head to drop that off.

It basically stated that I had "decided to stay with the organziation until they decide to terminate me".

I made a copy of this for myself...and took another copy to the Dept Head and dropped it off.

The weird thing about it is that two times after that, they were saying to me, "Now, I know you made this decison, but please don't do this in haste, because you'll be forfeighting your vacation" they kept pushing it...even the HR Director....I even told her, "I'm sticking with my decision"

Then I give them letter to put in my file telling them basically "my opinion of their organization" (Don't worry, it was professional sounding.

I called it an "Exit Letter" because....well, literally it means what it says, a generic term. I am "Exiting" the organziation (Be it voluntary or involuntary) but that's irrelavent.

THEY took that letter to be my "Resignation" letter, and sent me this form letter, "Okay, we accept your resignation"

I about blew a gasket, and thought "What is it with these people!!!!!"

See, I live in a hick town, with people, well, who can be a bit backwards <shrug> But it's growing, so it has potential (Sorry, I'm really bent out of shape about this.

Oh, to bring up another thought....guess what, this is just a hypothetical...."Hey, they think I resigned, so they are going to give me my vacation and sick time like they said they would, right? :D

See, where I'm getting at?

The organization, from what I heard.....typically, if they want to get rid of someone they always "ask them to resign" instead of saying "you're fired"

Unorthodox, I suppose.

I do not understand why you labled it an "exit letter," however it is too late to change that. The content of the letter can and will be more material to the nature of the separation. Without access to the letter itself, it is very difficult to offer a more educated opinion as to whether Agency will determine it is a resignation letter or not.

I do not understand why you labled it an "exit letter," however it is too late to change that. The content of the letter can and will be more material to the natrure of the separation. Without access to the letter itself, it is very difficult to offer a more educated opinion as to whether to Agency will determine it is a resignation letter or not.

Well, without showing you the letter itself...I would have to say indeed, that the content therein has nothing to do with my resignation.

It moreover covers my differences in opinions and greviences with management, and also how they seem to contradict and not follow the rules of their own policies and procedures manual. I started it off with, "I've learned alot while in the employ with the organziation....however (the greviences go on from there) Basically, telling them what I thought of them.

It basically tells of my experiences with the organziation, and how I chose to mentally put that place behind me. I wrote it ahead of time, because I was preparing myself for what was an easy prediction of what was going to happen.

No where in the letter it states, "I,<my Name>, hereby write this as a letter of resignation" or "....I, <my name>, hereby resign from <name of organization>"

Nothing in the content of the letter it states about how I "resign" or "I quit".

Perhaps they are "assuming" that's my resignation letter.

Why I labeled it my exit letter? Well, because that's what I am doing, it's a letter written for when I "exit" the organziation (be it termination or resignation...in my case, termination)

I called the Unemployment office, and they asked if I signed anything, like any kind of paperwork in regards to my termination.

And I said, "No did not" which I found unusual....I guess they can say "You're fired" without you having to sign any paper work? I suppose so...but that maybe in my favor.

He also asked if I have any documentation, in which I was given an "Ultimatum", and I did say I had a copy of a letter I submitted to the Dept Head giving them my "I'll stay till you terminate me" decision. So that's something there.

But it was so funny, that they kept pushing and pushing and pushing for me to "resign", just so I won't lose my vac and sick leave and also have this "black mark" on my record. And that I would be ineligible for re-hire with their organization. (Like I would want to work for them again).

So, hope this sheds some light.

Just so that you know, it is not necessary for the words "I quit" or "I resign" or any variant of that phrase to appear, for it to be termed a resignation letter. It will depend on the context of the whole.

Just so that you know, it is not necessary for the words "I quit" or "I resign" or any variant of that phrase to appear, for it to be termed a resignation letter. It will depend on the context of the whole.

Well, I guess that means I'm screwed, and I'm out on the street begging for money then.

Okay, to sound more "positive" I feel that, with the context that is in the letter, that it doesn't mean I'm resigning or quitting.

But personally, I think it was their intention to screw me out of Unemployment Compensation.

Thing of it is, was...they were trying to get me to QUIT, on numerous occassions.

Just like for anyone you work for, they only do things that's in THEIR best interest.

How long did you work for this organization? You should be glad you are out of there. Companies can sometimes use tricky techniques to discharge an employee. Much Luck with your future.

How long did you work for this organization? You should be glad you are out of there. Companies can sometimes use tricky techniques to discharge an employee. Much Luck with your future.

I was with them for over 2 years.

Yes, from what I am learning, people don't care about people, much less other employers. People these days, are willing to screw you over in a heartbeat.

This will be quite unusual, since it's a government entity, not some fly by night shop owner trying to get out of paying unemployment.

Well, I guess that means I'm screwed, and I'm out on the street begging for money then.

Nobody is saying that and personally I do not think that is the case. The so-called "exit letter" you wrote may make you contention that your were discharged more difficult to demonstrate, but it is by no means an impossible argument.

Also, unemployment laws are to be liberally construed in favor of the displaced worker, ie, you. It is far more likely in a case of he said/she said that you as the displaced worker with no income with be believed versus the employer.

I am trying to state that you have an argument and should continue to pursue that argument in the course of your unemployment claim. A defeatist, woe-is-me attitude will only cast doubt on your credibility.

Question: Have you received a determination whether or not you are eligible from the Agency yet?

I'm just getting a little scared ,not self-defeatest, but I do intend on taking it all the way if I have to.

They have not determined anything yet, because I just file for unemployment a couple of days ago, I called the office, and they said give it a couple of weeks, so keep that job search going.


Nobody is saying that and personally I do not think that is the case. The so-called "exit letter" you wrote may make you contention that your were discharged more difficult to demonstrate, but it is by no means an impossible argument.

Also, unemployment laws are to be liberally construed in favor of the displaced worker, ie, you. It is far more likely in a case of he said/she said that you as the displaced worker with no income with be believed versus the employer.

I am trying to state that you have an argument and should continue to pursue that argument in the course of your unemployment claim. A defeatist, woe-is-me attitude will only cast doubt on your credibility.

Question: Have you received a determination whether or not you are eligible from the Agency yet?

Understood.

It will likely take at least two (2) weeks before you receive a determination. Certainly keep us informed of the decision.

Understood.

It will likely take at least two (2) weeks before you receive a determination. Certainly keep us informed of the decision.

Will do, hope I don't get a raw deal.....I call in my weeks on the 22nd of Aug.

Even if unemployment is denied; there is always an appeals process. I feel it is terrible that a company would fight to prevent someone from receiving 70-80% of their original salary. Every one has to put food on the table. You ought to be glad you no longer work for this place. I know it is hard when your source of survival is cut off and to make it worse; the very ones who cut your means of survival don't want to get UE benefits. Companies will certainly not go broke paying UE benefits. Aside from loss of income, I am sure you have Insurance issues (health, dental etc). Businesses could care less about people that is the cold truth. Keep your chin up. Nothing is impossible

Dolly is correct that the determination can be appealed, but be advised that it can be appealed by either you or the employer depending who is the aggrieved party.

Dolly is correct that the determination can be appealed, but be advised that it cab be appealed by either you or the employer depending who is the aggrieved party. It will result in a hearing schduled before an Appeals Referee.

However, Dolly, I disagree with your opinion that employer should not ever contest unemployment benefits. Unemployment (except in a very few states and even then it is miniscule) is completely funded by employers and can most definitely affect their bottomline if failed to adequately address every displaced employee's claim regardless of the reason for separation.

Is it your opinion that an employer should not contest the claim of a former employee who stole; or comitted and A&B on a co-worker; or who walked off the job; etc.?

A previous poster said that the definition of insuboordination is irrelevant. I disagree.

If the employee has been insuboordinate on numerous occasions, has been counseled for those instaces, and continues to be insuboordinate, then the employer may have a case for misconduct, which could potentially disqualify the employee for benefits for at least a portion of his eligible period.

Also, I question whether they can take away accrued vacation and other personal time by converting an employee to a "probationary" period. A probationary employee is typically one who is new to the company, not one who has been there for two years. I wonder if the company is trying to back-door into F.S. 443.131(3)(a)2 to avoid the benefits charge for the eventual termination. (This seems like it would not be successful, but I've never seen it tried in practice.)

Hello Mike

Yes, true, insubordination can qualify for misconduct....however....in MY case....they were claiming that I was insubordinate because I "failed to complete tasks assigned by my supervisor"

When my Policy Manual states that it is "Refusale to do the tasks assigned by your supervisor " or obviously "Abusive language toward yoru supervisor"

Which would mean, telling the boss to go "F himself" or whatever.

In MY case, it was merely a performance issue, and nothing more, but they are making it out to be insubordination.



A previous poster said that the definition of insuboordination is irrelevant. I disagree.

If the employee has been insuboordinate on numerous occasions, has been counseled for those instaces, and continues to be insuboordinate, then the employer may have a case for misconduct, which could potentially disqualify the employee for benefits for at least a portion of his eligible period.

Also, I question whether they can take away accrued vacation and other personal time by converting an employee to a "probationary" period. A probationary employee is typically one who is new to the company, not one who has been there for two years. I wonder if the company is trying to back-door into F.S. 443.131(3)(a)2 to avoid the benefits charge for the eventual termination. (This seems like it would not be successful, but I've never seen it tried in practice.)

A previous poster said that the definition of insuboordination is irrelevant. I disagree.

While I do not think this ecactly stated by any previous poster, I will suggest that the employer's subjective definition of insubordination is absolutely irrelevant. It is the AWI's definition and, more specifically, the person adjudicating claim defnition that is relevant.