Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Question: Ohio - Employer resignation/termination

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

  • Question: Ohio - Employer resignation/termination

    As an employer I have recently had an employee give two weeks notice. During those last two weeks job performance has dropped, they have not put in all hours as a salaried employer, and have been disgrunteled employee. Can the employer go ahead and terminate the employee, and instead of paying them their full salary, just pay them for the hours worked and cut the losses?

    They employee is salaried but has not worked all hours scheduled or even close to 40 hours per week.

    Anythoughts or suggestion would be apprecaited...

    thanks

  • #2
    sure you can welch.

    You could have accepted the resignation at any time. If the performance of the individual has dropped that much, cut them loose tomorrow.

    Pay them for every moment up until tomorrow that they worked, but not a moment more.
    Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

    I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

    Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

    Comment


    • #3
      You may terminate the relationship at anytime. However you must pay this person for time they were at work (even if not working) This is not welching. The employee terminated the relationship you are just accpeting his termination earlier than two weeks. Perfectly legal and done all the time
      http://www.parentnook.com/forum/

      Comment


      • #4
        the resignation was accepted, but since then the employee has reduced performance, not showed up for scheduled shifts, and been no doing all her assigned duties duringhte times she is at work.

        I want to fire and only pay her the wages she earned. a salaried employee, how does one just pay for the hours worked even thought she has not worked the hours she was scheduled and cut the losses??

        Comment


        • #5
          Example let say this persons salary is $500.00 a week that comes out to $100.00 a day on a five day work week
          http://www.parentnook.com/forum/

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by joec
            If you welch he may sue you. I would. In Georgia mayby welching is in Vogue,your north of the Mason Dixon line you cant welch.
            JoeC
            Joe, north or south of the Mason Dixon is irrelevent.

            No matter where in the employee/employer relationship the current situation is, you never have to ignore poor performance. Ever.

            If anyone "welched", it was the employee that thought they could coast on the employer's dime.
            Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

            I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

            Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by joec
              No No No panther welching on a deal,where an employee acts in good faith giving a required two weeks notice at the convince of the employer. The employer like wise has to act in good faith,and accept the two weeks notice.

              If the employer welches the employee can sue in small claims court for the two weeks pay,and the judge has it at his discretion to award it. If he felt like it could slap punitive award. Thats done all the time as well,it is being done more,and more. Courts are basically saying a deals a deal.
              JoeC
              The employee hasn't shown up for shifts.

              Even one of your fly girls would see that wasn't proper performance.
              Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

              I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

              Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

              Comment


              • #8
                There was no deal to welch on. Joe is wrong! Employer often ask employees to leave before they finish their two week notice. read through these forums its done all the time and its legal! Yes it was a nice jesture to give notice but employee doe snot have to and employer doe snot have to accept a two week notice. Nor should employer pay him two weeks if he asks him to leave before that. If that were case we would all give a 20 year notice and never show up again!
                http://www.parentnook.com/forum/

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by panther10758 View Post
                  There was no deal to welch on. Joe is wrong! Employer often ask employees to leave before they finish their two week notice. read through these forums its done all the time and its legal! Yes it was a nice jesture to give notice but employee doe snot have to and employer doe snot have to accept a two week notice. Nor should employer pay him two weeks if he asks him to leave before that. If that were case we would all give a 20 year notice and never show up again!
                  To Joe's point, if the deal was agreed to by both parties, it might be enforceable. However, the employer didn't break the deal, the employee did by not showing up.
                  Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

                  I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

                  Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by cyjeff View Post
                    To Joe's point, if the deal was agreed to by both parties, it might be enforceable. However, the employer didn't break the deal, the employee did by not showing up.
                    If (big IF) there was a deal (I see no deal) it negated by breach by employee as Cyjeff states above in bold There can be no suit (although I fail to see even a glimmer of one) because the employee did not keep his end of alledged deal
                    http://www.parentnook.com/forum/

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by joec
                      Give the full two weeks,and tell her good bye. Then you don't have to worry about litigation. If you welch, like some cigar chomping cracker boss dealing with sharecroppers,the employee could sue you.
                      JoeC
                      No.

                      It is not illegal to demand fair work for fair pay. It is not illegal that when one half of that contract breaks it that the other half is also off the hook.

                      I would term her tomorrow. Not one dime more than she deserves.
                      Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

                      I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

                      Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I wouldnt hold my breath on that law suit. However keep in mind everyone here is a volunteer. There are few actual Labor law Attorneys on this site. Most of speak from experince, backgrounds or knowledge from a variety of souces which may not include Law degrees or legal knowledge. If you want actual legal advice seek an Attorney's advice. Real legal advice comes an Attorney skilled in topic and familar with local laws
                        http://www.parentnook.com/forum/

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by kstew View Post
                          As an employer I have recently had an employee give two weeks notice. During those last two weeks job performance has dropped, they have not put in all hours as a salaried employer, and have been disgrunteled employee. Can the employer go ahead and terminate the employee, and instead of paying them their full salary, just pay them for the hours worked and cut the losses?

                          They employee is salaried but has not worked all hours scheduled or even close to 40 hours per week.

                          Anythoughts or suggestion would be apprecaited...

                          thanks
                          Many salaried employees still punch a clock or have some other form to document arrival and departure times. I know I have terminated numerous persons for time theft and many did not punch a clock. However ignoring that for a moment the decrease in production is good cause to terminate
                          http://www.parentnook.com/forum/

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Where does it say the employer required two weeks notice or had any sort of deal to employ the person for the 2 weeks? At most the employee might be able to get unemployment for the remaining time, but it is doubtful if they stopped showing up and most states have a one week waiting period as well.

                            I usually agree it is better to pay out the 2 week notice if for some reason the employer is unwilling or unable to let the person work out that time however, in a case like this I would not. It just sends the message that once you put in notice, you can do as you please, and still get paid. Not a very good morale booster for the rest of the employees who are remaining and must pick up the slack. How is it fair to them to allow this person to disrupt the workplace and get paid for it?

                            For that matter as employment is at will unless there is a contract to the contrary, even had the employee not given notice, they could legally be terminated for not showing up and not performing the required work when they did.

                            http://www.myemploymentlawyer.com/me...answer_id=2807

                            http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/ne...-Ohio-5903.pdf This case is not exactly the same situation but much of the reasoning applies.

                            Notwithstanding, we do note that it
                            has been held that employment terminated on the giving of a specified notice is
                            still employment at-will, and not employment for a specified term. See La France
                            Electrical Construction & Supply Co. v. Interntl. Bhd. of Electrical Workers,
                            Local No. 8 (1923), 108 Ohio St. 61, 88. Specifically, where an employment
                            agreement requires a written notice of the employee’s intention to terminate
                            employment, such a notice provision does not “establish a term for the duration of
                            [a] contract, but merely a period of convenient notice[,]” and the relationship
                            between the employer and the employee remains at-will.
                            Last edited by ElleMD; 03-20-2008, 07:48 PM.
                            I post with the full knowledge and support of my employer, though the opinions rendered are my own and not necessarily representative of their position. In other words, I'm a free agent.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              You are still going on the assumption that any sort of promise was made and that the employer required the employee to give the notice and it wasn't just done as is common practice. Ohio has held that even when required it doesn't entitle the employee to any greater job or wage security. While a small claims judge may overturn precedent, they certainly aren't obligated to do so and in the case of an employee who started skipping shifts, refusing to work and disrupted the workplace, I just don't see a lot of hope that a judge would find it so eggregious to fire them and go against precedent in awarding back wages. It is just as possible and more likely that a judge would stick to precedent and decide this person isn't owed a dime. Plantiffs who don't play by the rules and uphold their end of the bargain don't garner the sympathy of judges.

                              Nothing an employer does can guarantee that an employee won't file a suit. Heck they could decide to pay this person for the 2 weeks plus severance and it wouldn't keep someone from dreaming up some reason they feel they should be paid more. There is just no amount of money that can prevent a claim. That possibility is always going to exist.

                              That is really outside the question of whether the state requires that the notice period be paid out no matter what, which it does not.

                              As an employer you really can not make business decisions based on what a rogue judge may do in the unlikely event someone brings a suit for something where there is clear precedent to the contrary. It just doesn't make good business sense to assume that a judge will overturn legal precedent, whether in your favor or not.
                              I post with the full knowledge and support of my employer, though the opinions rendered are my own and not necessarily representative of their position. In other words, I'm a free agent.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X