Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

90 day probationary period California

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 90 day probationary period California

    am considering relocating to California and starting new business....curious as to is CA a "right to work" state, is there a 90 day probationary period whereby if an employee does not meet excpectations you are liable for unemployment but can still terminate without many of the other ramifications?

    I see the complexity of state rules and regs but unable to find this info...

    thx in advance.....

  • #2
    Probation periods are at employers discretion. Also I think term your looking fo ris "at will" and yes CA is an 'at will" state
    http://www.parentnook.com/forum/

    Comment


    • #3
      thx

      you are correct it is at will, thx for clarification.....and answer on the probationary piece.....

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by panther10758 View Post
        Probation periods are at employers discretion. Also I think term your looking fo ris "at will" and yes CA is an 'at will" state

        I answered that
        http://www.parentnook.com/forum/

        Comment


        • #5
          au73: Is there a 90 day probationary period whereby if an employee does not meet excpectations you are liable for unemployment but can still terminate without many of the other ramifications?

          Absent an express or implied contract that provides differently, an employer generally has the unilateral right to terminate an employee whenever he/she wants - after 7 days, 90 days, 120 days, 560 days, etc. provided it is not for an illegal reason (age, sex, race, religious beliefs, etc.).

          au73: If an employee does not meet expectations, you {employer} are liable for unemployment...

          Just to be clear, employers are not directly responsible for paying a terminated employee's unemployment benefits. These benefits are paid to the employee by the state. Employers merely contribute to a state fund - a big pool. Point being: You may pay significantly less into the pool than what your terminated employee actually receives.
          Barry S. Phillips, CPA
          www.BarryPhillips.com

          IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: This response is intended to provide general information and written for educational purposes only. It does not establish a client relationship. This communication is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to any party any matters addressed herein.

          Comment


          • #6
            Your employee may be given UI if termed during the 90 day period. The state doesnt care about the probationary period. Its not of interest to them so they treat a probationary dismissal the same as one that is not in the probationary period.

            They focus on why the employee was terminated and whether it was under the employee's control or not.
            So if you have someone who violates policy and is terminated, they are less likely to recieve UI than someone who you hired and never could do the work. Thats more looked at as you made a bad hiring decision, rather than being the employee's fault.
            I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have.
            Thomas Jefferson

            Comment


            • #7
              If your employee handbook or job-offer letters is going to indicate that new hires will face a 60- or 90-day "probation" period, you should consider dropping not having that policy, or at the very least, referring to that period as an "introductory" period.

              Reason: By setting up a probation period, you imply that once the probation period is over, the employee becomes "permanent" and earns some new level of job security. That misunderstanding could eliminate the employee’s at-will status. Never refer to "permanent employees" -- call them "regular employees" Nothing is permanent except taxes and Clorox bottles.

              There was a recent case in Dore v. Arnold Worldwide Inc., Cal. Ct. App., 2004, where Dore signed a job-offer letter than characterized his employment as "at-will." The letter said that phrase meant the company had the right to fire him "at an time just as you have the right to terminate your employment at any time." The letter also provided for a 90-day probationary period.

              Two years later, the company fired Dore but gave no reason. Dore sued for breach of contract, claiming the letter obligated the company to fire him only for good cause.

              A federal appeals court sided with Dore, saying the company limited the meaning of at-will to termination "at any time," but not necessarily "for any reason." The court also said the presence of a "probation period" called into question whether Dore was entitled to be fired only for good cause.
              Somedays you're the windshield and somedays you're the bug.

              Comment


              • #8
                Excellent advice, mlane58!
                Barry S. Phillips, CPA
                www.BarryPhillips.com

                IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: This response is intended to provide general information and written for educational purposes only. It does not establish a client relationship. This communication is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to any party any matters addressed herein.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Thanks Barry, I have my moments.
                  Somedays you're the windshield and somedays you're the bug.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    thanks to all for the great input...introductory period does sound more appropriate....

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X