:confused: I am the manager for a billing company who fired an employee due to her poor work performance and inability to complete tasks given to her. Even though she was only employed with us for less than 30 days, she filed for unemployment and we have had two hearings regarding this matter. My question is this: Since she was within our mandatory 90-day probationary period, which is clearly stated in our Employee Manual that she read and signed, is there any state or federal law that prevents us from firing her? I thought that I read in the State of Ohio Employee Manual that as long as an employee is within the probationary period, an employer was able to fire him/her without cause. Is there some where I can find the actual law on this? I have to file an appeal and to have actual laws would be greatly helpful. Thanks!

You seem to be confusing two different things; receiving unemployment benefits vs. legal termination.

Ohio is an at-will state. In an at will state, an employee can quit at any time and for any reason, and an employer can fire them at any time and for any reason not specifically prohibited by law. This is true regardless of whether your employee is in your company probationary period. (BTW, except in the state of Montana, a company probationary period is generally meaningless as far as the law is concerned.)

It was perfectly legal for you to fire her. But the fact that legally terminated and/or in her probationary period does not mean that she is not entitled to file for unemployment. Generally poor performance is NOT a valid reason to disqualify her for benefits under the laws of most states, probationary period or not. It is unlikely that she will not ultimately qualify. It does not mean that you did something wrong by firing her, but she does not have to have been illegally termed before she can collect UI. The vast majority of people collecting unemployment were legally termed.

You are right; I probably am criss-crossing the two. I was trying to be as brief as possible, and in doing so I guess I combined both issues. This case has been extremely frustrating because they denied her claim the first time, then she filed an appeal (not within the given time frame allowed, so she had to appeal the time frame ruling as well!) and we then had two hearings. Basically the ruling (in her favor) came down to the fact that 8 days prior to me firing her, I gave her a written warning that stated she had 2 weeks to improve her performance, and "if little or no improvement [was seen], or if things [got] worse, additional disciplinary action [would] be taken." The Commission Board's Hearing Officer stated I did not give her enough time to improve and that her behavior following the written warning did not justify her termination. I know you are limited in what information you can provide me with, but since I have filed an appeal to their ruling, I guess I am wondering if it is worth fighting?!?! She has been off of work for a year and a half and had two claims with previous employers as well. We were the last employer and are going to get stuck paying all the back pay if the ruling stays as is. Thanks so much for your time...I know this one is a doosey! :)

If she has had no reportable income for a year-and-a-half prior to working only 30 days with you, she's not going to be able to get benefits anyway. I wouldn't worry about it. Just respond to the notice that she has filed, if you haven't already.

And even if she did, the lookback period is such that you would not be the "chargeable" employer, so it would not affect your UI tax rate.

I have to agree with Patty that I doubt that you will be found liable for unemployment.

Below is a link regarding "base periods" in the State of Ohio:

http://jfs.ohio.gov/unemp_comp_faq/faq_elig_definitions1.stm#covered_employment

I doubt that you will be an interested party from a monetary standpoint, therefore you will not be liable at all. As an FYI, an employer can never be liable for unemployment benefits in excess of what the person was actually paid in gross wages.

Thanks for all of your replies. The last line of "rjc's" reply is the one I will be most interested in, because I think it is most fitting in this circumstance. A note to Pattymd: She hasn't been employed for a year and a half since I fired her, not before she worked for us. That was what was most concerning to me about us being stuck paying her unemployment for the past year and a half. But based on rjc's reply, hopefully we will only be responsible for the total amount we paid her for the 20-some days she worked for us. RJC - do you have a link where I can find that information you recited for me? It would be very helpful if I had a state or federal site I could look and a refer to during the next hearing! Thanks to all for your advice...you guys do a GREAT thing here with these forums and I give you MUCH credit in all your efforts to help people like us!

Ah, I must have misunderstood. Sorry. :o