FC Community
Discussion Boards => Off-Topic => Topic started by: countrygirl12 on July 07, 2015, 10:22:11 am
-
I may have asked this question before but can't remember. The topic came up at work the other day and I wanted to get your alls opinion. Do you think it is right for a boss to know they are going to fire someone but wait until the end of the day and then fire them because they need them to work that day? Seems to me if you are going to get rid of them you should do it immediately when you decide that is the action you are taking. In my opinion it is wrong to have them work all day then call them in and fire them. A couple of co-workers said that is what they would do.
What do you think?
-
When I did work the boss always waited until the end of the day to fire that person. And I would think that was so rude because they just busted their butt for 8hrs and then just let them go. If I was a boss and had to fire someone I would do it as soon as they got to work.
-
Where I worked all people fired were nade to work most of the day, then got the news. I can't ever remember anyone losing their job in the morning.
-
i think this is the norm to work that day and then not come back --i would hope tho that there is a good reason for firing the person if they needed them to work that day then why not tomorrow??
-
I think it would depend on the seriousness why they were being terminated.
If it was very serious i think it should be addressed immediately when day starts.
If they were just being laid off,maybe you allow them 1 days pay more,but i can agree with first thing in morning on all accounts.
It just might take someone who has to do dirty work to muster up courage to do this as well especially if its a sudden lay-off where the employee is going to be very hurt.
-
The reason they do this is so the rest of the staff will work all day.....firing a co worker is disruptive because people are people and every one will have an opinion. They usually do it on a Friday too.
-
We used to be in business and did a lot of hiring but not too much firing. I can only recall twice when we fired someone; once a delivery person for stealing money from the coke machine and once an office worker who stole $200. The delivery person was fired on the spot but we kept the office worker most of the day so we could get to a time of day when she would count her money drawer. (I had spot-checked her money drawer the evening before when I was working late and knew it was short) She said she was only borrowing it and intended to pay it back. She signed a confession (so we would not be penalized for unlawfully terminating her)and left. We paid her up to the time she left that day.
-
I agree, very wrong. It needs to be done by phone or when the individual arrives.
-
It all depends at how you look at it. Maybe he feels sorry for that person and wanted them to get a full days pay before he let them go. Or maybe he wanted to be a d-bag and let them work until the very end and gave them the bad news. It could have been malicious or not, depending on what grounds the boss needed to fire them for.
-
I have never been fired but have been laid off several times
Only once was I let go a the end of day with no prior warning.
There is a big difference if someone is being fired. They have done something wrong
Each case is different and it actually to be dangerous for a company to fire someone these days.
It might be better to have them work a full day before firing them. :rainbow: :rainbow: :rose: :wave:
-
Yes I can see your point, that is rather sending out contradictory messages because on the one hand, you want to get rid of the employee, but on the other hand, you don't want rid of them quite yet. I have never known this happen before. When I've worked for a company that wanted rid of somebody, they always called them into the meeting room as soon as all decision makers had arrived. That's it, by 10am, they were gone!
-
I haven't gotten fired but I;'m sure they've wanted to a few times! :)
-
I agree, very wrong. It needs to be done by phone or when the individual arrives.
I disagree. Firing over the phone is wrong. I just think that whatever the offense is when ever you make that decision then fire them right then. Not use them because you can't do without them and then fire them.
-
It all depends at how you look at it. Maybe he feels sorry for that person and wanted them to get a full days pay before he let them go. Or maybe he wanted to be a d-bag and let them work until the very end and gave them the bad news. It could have been malicious or not, depending on what grounds the boss needed to fire them for.
If he felt sorry for them then they could most likely work something out or use some other punishment.
-
I have never been fired but have been laid off several times
Only once was I let go a the end of day with no prior warning.
There is a big difference if someone is being fired. They have done something wrong
Each case is different and it actually to be dangerous for a company to fire someone these days.
It might be better to have them work a full day before firing them. :rainbow: :rainbow: :rose: :wave:
Laid off is not the same as being fired. If you are laid off then most likely you can draw unemployment with no issues. If you are fired you have to fight for the unemployment if you were fired unjustly. If it is for theft or something like that then if they can prove it you can't draw.
Like the situation above where she signed a confession. If she had not signed that then the employer would have to prove the employee actually stole the money. The thing about firing at the end of the day when you knew all day you were going to do it is that is more likely to make someone mad. And you are right - it is dangerous because people are crazy. I know of a situation where a man fired an employee for stealing tools. The next morning he came to work and shot his exboss and killed him. The specific situation that prompted the question the person was fired based on a lie told by a customer. But the person was made to work 2 days before they were fired because it was the first of the month and they really needed them. I just think that is wrong.
-
Yes I can see your point, that is rather sending out contradictory messages because on the one hand, you want to get rid of the employee, but on the other hand, you don't want rid of them quite yet. I have never known this happen before. When I've worked for a company that wanted rid of somebody, they always called them into the meeting room as soon as all decision makers had arrived. That's it, by 10am, they were gone!
Maybe it's the area I live in. Idk. I know of several situations where a person was fired after working their full shift. Called into the office within 10 minutes of quitting time and fired. I commit a fire-able offense then do it then. Don't let me work my shift because my leaving will leave you short handed. The lack of pay will leave me short handed.
-
I haven't gotten fired but I;'m sure they've wanted to a few times! :)
lol. I don't know about that. We have like 7 managers where I work and although any of them can say something to me if MY boss is there he usually handles it. The other manager will go tell him because it would be his department. I don't think I have ever done anything that would even remotely be a firing offense. Although there are times I have wanted to knock a customer's head off. lol
-
I think I'd rather get fired at the end of the day and get one more day of salary. I would not like it if I went to the trouble of getting ready for work only to be sent home when I arrived.
-
I say it depends on what day it is - if it's a Monday - yes it's wrong but if it's a Friday, well that's being courteous to the person who is going to be fired by letting them finish out the week.
-
The reason why the employer keeps the person for their shift is because per labor laws they have to pay the employee X number of hours for showing up anyway whether the person works them or not. If the person is getting fired for something minor, for example Attendance issues, they might as well just keep the person for their shift, then the person who may need the money will appreciate it anyway, as will the rest of the staff for not being short handed. Also, if a person gets fired, the employer has to have their last check in hand to give them at the time of firing, so they have to calculate how long the person will be working in advance. This is why sometimes instead of direct firing for an offense, the employer puts them out for unpaid investigatory suspension. Most of the time it is so the accounting department can figure out their last check.
-
I say it depends on what day it is - if it's a Monday - yes it's wrong but if it's a Friday, well that's being courteous to the person who is going to be fired by letting them finish out the week.
It's not courteous unless the person wants to stay and finish the day. If you know you are going to fire me then do it. Let me go on home. Don't make me work only because you will be short handed by sending me home because nobody else is going to cover for me.
-
The reason why the employer keeps the person for their shift is because per labor laws they have to pay the employee X number of hours for showing up anyway whether the person works them or not. If the person is getting fired for something minor, for example Attendance issues, they might as well just keep the person for their shift, then the person who may need the money will appreciate it anyway, as will the rest of the staff for not being short handed. Also, if a person gets fired, the employer has to have their last check in hand to give them at the time of firing, so they have to calculate how long the person will be working in advance. This is why sometimes instead of direct firing for an offense, the employer puts them out for unpaid investigatory suspension. Most of the time it is so the accounting department can figure out their last check.
Not if you are fired. Yes if I go in and it is slow and they send me home they have to pay me for 4 hours but only if I make them. If you don't call them on it and they can get away with it then they won't do it. You also do not have to have the last check in hand at the time of firing. They do have to pay you everything they owe you with in so much time but not at the time of firing. Some people do stupid stuff and get fired on the spot (or use to) and there is no way to have a check in hand.
On my job now if it is slow and they are sending people home early they just have you stay 4 hours even if you aren't doing anything because they have to pay you anyway for at least 4 hours if you show up.
-
I dont know why they do that way. but there is definitely a reason why they do like that. otherwise they wouldnt do that.
I ahve seen a boss making sure they employee finishes all the work for more than a week tehn fired
-
I agree with you. If there's cause to fire an employee, it's normally done immediately. I've never been employed anywhere where they didn't let the person go right away. Then again, the world is a different place today and they'll suck every last drop from you before they get rid of you.
-
I never worked a person through the day knowing I was going to let them go. Normal thing was to call them into the office and told them then. There is never a good time to have to tell a person they are being let go. But there has been a couple of time a person was fired on the spot. both were for stealing.
-
The reason why the employer keeps the person for their shift is because per labor laws they have to pay the employee X number of hours for showing up anyway whether the person works them or not. If the person is getting fired for something minor, for example Attendance issues, they might as well just keep the person for their shift, then the person who may need the money will appreciate it anyway, as will the rest of the staff for not being short handed. Also, if a person gets fired, the employer has to have their last check in hand to give them at the time of firing, so they have to calculate how long the person will be working in advance. This is why sometimes instead of direct firing for an offense, the employer puts them out for unpaid investigatory suspension. Most of the time it is so the accounting department can figure out their last check.
Not if you are fired. Yes if I go in and it is slow and they send me home they have to pay me for 4 hours but only if I make them. If you don't call them on it and they can get away with it then they won't do it. You also do not have to have the last check in hand at the time of firing. They do have to pay you everything they owe you with in so much time but not at the time of firing. Some people do stupid stuff and get fired on the spot (or use to) and there is no way to have a check in hand.
On my job now if it is slow and they are sending people home early they just have you stay 4 hours even if you aren't doing anything because they have to pay you anyway for at least 4 hours if you show up.
This varies by state. In California this is how it is, California has very strict labor laws if you know your rights. I should have mentioned that, "in California this is how it is". If you fire someone no matter what the deal is, they need to cut them a check right then, if you don't get a final check it is easy to file a complaint with the Labor Standards Board, you can do it online.
California Labor Law: When the Employer Terminates the Employee
If the employment relationship ends because the employer terminates the employee, lays them off, or otherwise lets them go, the employee's final paycheck must be provided to them on their last day of work. (Labor Code § 201.) The employer is subject to various penalties if it waits until the next regularly scheduled payday to pay the employee their final wages. (Labor Code § 203.)
-
As long as the individual is getting paid for that day - I think most people would terminate the employee at the end of the day. Maybe it should depend on WHY that individual is losing their job. If the employee can't be trusted they should probably leave as soon as it's decided to fire them.
:heart:
-
I agree with you. If there's cause to fire an employee, it's normally done immediately. I've never been employed anywhere where they didn't let the person go right away. Then again, the world is a different place today and they'll suck every last drop from you before they get rid of you.
Exactly.
Aflyingmonkey- Yes, I guess it is different by state. I think where I am it is the next pay day but you have to be paid all you are owed. So it would be by the end of the week.
As long as the individual is getting paid for that day - I think most people would terminate the employee at the end of the day. Maybe it should depend on WHY that individual is losing their job. If the employee can't be trusted they should probably leave as soon as it's decided to fire them. :heart:
Idk. In my current job if I go in Saturday and they are going to fire me then tell me when I get there or call me and tell me not to come into work. Do NOT make me work ALL DAY Saturday and then call me in the office and fire me. That is not fair to me. Give me the choice. You are fired after today. You can work today or you can go on home. Well, screw you. I am going home. Good luck getting someone to come in and cover my shift. No, they will have me work because they need me. Idk. To me that just isn't right.
-
The one job I was let go from was on a Friday afternoon and without warning. It was a big shock to the system but thankfully managed to find a new job within a few weeks.
-
I think there are way too many variables to even think about. I have never heard of someone being fired right when they get to work, although when I was laid off from a job many years ago they told me about 45 minutes after I got there. I was annoyed that they hadn't just called me and told me to not bother coming in.
At my current employer people are usually let go around lunch or afternoon.
-
The one job I was let go from was on a Friday afternoon and without warning. It was a big shock to the system but thankfully managed to find a new job within a few weeks.
But were you laid off? Or were you fired? There is a difference. Say for example a person is fired for a customer complaint. If the complaint (whether true or not) is enough that the person will be fired then they need to fire them immediately. Not use them a couple more days thru a busy stretch or holiday and then fire them. To me that is just wrong. But then again, I wouldn't expect a place of business to treat their employees right anyway.
-
I think that waiting until the end of the day is more than just getting more work out of someone. If you are thinking of letting someone go their work is most likely haphazard and you are doing them a favor by letting them see another eight hours. By waiting till the end of the day you are able to let the employee save face, able to keep that employee from poisoning others with negativity, and can ensure a swift departure from the building without much time for rebuttal. Firing someone at the beginning of a day can kill the productivity of others within the department as they chatter on incessantly about what just happened or start wondering if they are next (an end of the day termination lets people go home and think about all of these things and come back in with a fresher perspective).
-
So they will "chatter" the next day. And rebuttal can come the next day. Usually when someone is fired there is a reason and other employees should not "wonder if they are next" unless they were involved in the situation.
The specific situation I am referring to or that I am thinking about that sparked the question was a person who was working on a job that is tons busier at the first of the month. The company knew they were going to fire the person. But yet had them work the 1st - the 3rd because basically they couldn't do it without them. They really needed them to work those days because of the insane business at the first of the month. You know when the government checks come in.
I just thought it was wrong, unfair, and mean on the company's part to have this person work those 3 days when they knew at the end of the 3rd day they would be firing the person. If the person was okay to work those 3 days then obviously there was not an issue so serious that they needed to be fired. The company was not doing the person any great favors by "letting them work 3 more days". They were simply using the person. They "needed" them desperately for those days. Yes, that person got 3 more days of pay but that person also should have had the choice as to whether they work 3 more days or just go on home and let the company be short handed. And just to clear the record the person in my opinion was fired unjustifiably. There was no stealing, missing work, or anything like that. Basically a he said she said deal. Doesn't seem right that a person can be fired from their job because some anonymous person said he/she said something and there is no proof and the person accused say they didn't say it.
I just think that was really mean. But then again, I wouldn't expect anything less from someone higher up the corporate ladder.
-
Hey they were going to work that day anyway and as long as they get a full days pay it really doesn't matter. I know most of the time around here people get canned in the beginning of the day but still get the full days pay to try and keep the person calm. Yeah like a few extra bucks is going to make up for losing their job. Bottom line employers do what they want especially in employment at will states like where I live. 8)
-
Bosses do that stuff everyday. It is cruel. I have been in a situation like that. The place I worked for got rid of upper management and put in a whole new crew. They decided to clean house and I was caught in the mix. And yes, they waited until the day was over to tell me.
-
been laid off a few times,,,, let go once ( hated that job LOL) then got hired at a job that I was at for almost 18 years and they decided to close our store. so wanted to make that 20 year mark. But I had enough years in to retire so that is what I did !!!!
-
I may have asked this question before but can't remember. The topic came up at work the other day and I wanted to get your alls opinion. Do you think it is right for a boss to know they are going to fire someone but wait until the end of the day and then fire them because they need them to work that day? Seems to me if you are going to get rid of them you should do it immediately when you decide that is the action you are taking. In my opinion it is wrong to have them work all day then call them in and fire them. A couple of co-workers said that is what they would do.
What do you think?
I think it is wrong to wait until the end of day and to let them go. However it's done more often then not. It benefit them better to let them work and to fired them afterwards. Otherwise who would replace the worker? I've had a situation that they let me come to work after I've been let go off for the weekend. I was mad that they let me spend my money to come to work. Only to tell me your fired. :o >:(
-
I have never been fired. I have never really noticed if others were fired after their shift or not.... I just never paid any attention!
-
I may have asked this question before but can't remember. The topic came up at work the other day and I wanted to get your alls opinion. Do you think it is right for a boss to know they are going to fire someone but wait until the end of the day and then fire them because they need them to work that day? Seems to me if you are going to get rid of them you should do it immediately when you decide that is the action you are taking. In my opinion it is wrong to have them work all day then call them in and fire them. A couple of co-workers said that is what they would do.
What do you think?
I think it is wrong to wait until the end of day and to let them go. However it's done more often then not. It benefit them better to let them work and to fired them afterwards. Otherwise who would replace the worker? I've had a situation that they let me come to work after I've been let go off for the weekend. I was mad that they let me spend my money to come to work. Only to tell me your fired. :o >:(
Who cares who will replace the worker? If I am fired from my job then just fire me. Don't have me work that day and finish the day just because it will leave you short handed if I am not there. If the person can finish the work day then you can find another punishment and let them continue to work. If the offense is serious enough to be fired for then you do not need them on your property.
-
I have never been fired from a job, I have had my hours reduced tho due to lack of revenue, but never fired or let go.
-
Well, I guess you still got paid for the day....it's not like you worked for free~right?
-
I've only witnessed one person being fired, but have seen several people laid off -- big difference. When the person was fired, they were fired immediately. The person's manager and 2nd-level manager took the person into a conference room, showed them the complaint and had them sign it, and then had security escort the person off the premises. However when the people were laid off, they would tell the person a few weeks before the official "resource action" so that the people could start working on resumes and job hunting. The official resource action would usually occur on Friday; at noon / lunch-time they'd then issue the "pink slip" and let the person take the rest of the day off (while still paying them for the full day).
I think that that is the best way to handle employee termination. If the person did something so severe to warrant being fired, then do so immediately. Otherwise if an employee is just being laid off, the nicest thing is to notify the person that they will be laid off shortly, but then assist them in trying to find new employment (even being notified a week or two before termination can allow the person to get ready for the future).
-
It's not unfair because the person should get paid for that day...I think the big reason for firing at the end of the day is to reduce the distraction to other colleagues..wait until everyone has gone home, then do it so that there's no interference or distractions, etc....and the person being fired can't try to do anything to others, etc
-
I've only witnessed one person being fired, but have seen several people laid off -- big difference. When the person was fired, they were fired immediately. The person's manager and 2nd-level manager took the person into a conference room, showed them the complaint and had them sign it, and then had security escort the person off the premises. However when the people were laid off, they would tell the person a few weeks before the official "resource action" so that the people could start working on resumes and job hunting. The official resource action would usually occur on Friday; at noon / lunch-time they'd then issue the "pink slip" and let the person take the rest of the day off (while still paying them for the full day).
I think that that is the best way to handle employee termination. If the person did something so severe to warrant being fired, then do so immediately. Otherwise if an employee is just being laid off, the nicest thing is to notify the person that they will be laid off shortly, but then assist them in trying to find new employment (even being notified a week or two before termination can allow the person to get ready for the future).
I was not talking about being laid off. I know the difference. The person was FIRED. They were called in the office and told "your services are no longer needed". What was so bad was they were fired at the end of the day on the 3rd. The place they worked was really busy on the first and the third due to the government checks received on those days. I just think that is really dirty. The company knew they were going to fire the person at least a week before they did so. They needed the person's help because firing them would leave them short handed. They were not laid off. They were fired. And the reason for being fired was not because of an offense they committed. It was because of a lie an anonymous person told.
-
It's not unfair because the person should get paid for that day...I think the big reason for firing at the end of the day is to reduce the distraction to other colleagues..wait until everyone has gone home, then do it so that there's no interference or distractions, etc....and the person being fired can't try to do anything to others, etc
Most times they are not kept and fired after everyone goes home. And most times it won't be a distraction through out the day. If it will be then it will be a distraction the next day. I understand the person still gets paid for the day. But my deal is, say on my current job, if my boss is going to fire me then they need to do so immediately. Not have me work all day because it will hurt them to go ahead and let me go.
-
I agree, I think they should tell them as soon as they get to work that day and let them leave. But most employers wait until you have done your work for that day then give you your pink slip. Do not thik that is fair, but that's life.
-
It's not unfair because the person should get paid for that day...I think the big reason for firing at the end of the day is to reduce the distraction to other colleagues..wait until everyone has gone home, then do it so that there's no interference or distractions, etc....and the person being fired can't try to do anything to others, etc
One more thought - if they are going to try to do something to others they can do it the next day. Unless a coworker got them fired why would they do something to them anyway? I know a situation where a guy was fired for stealing. He went home that day. All is good. Or so you think. He went in the next morning and shot his ex-boss and killed him.
-
Hello,
I was wrongfully fired from a previous job. My boss did not wait until the end of the day to fire me. I was fired during lunch.
-
But also the person getting fired will get an entire days pay
-
It's always been that way, firing are usually done at the end of the day.
But I do understand how you may feel given the situation.
-
I think this is very common .. but if you look at another perspective .. the person getting fired gets an extra days pay that they would not have gotten if they were fired that morning.
-
I think in all the jobs I've had, when they decided to fire someone it was usually just as soon as the supervisor's/manager's got the time to do it....at any time during the shift. After the terminated left, everyone else just helped cover for them. I only remember once when someone worked a entire shift & then was terminated at the end...and I thought it was very tacky. (Especially since the manager made jokes about it later.)
Everytime someone got called to the manager's office and then came out, everyone would be asking "Did you get fired?" For that reason alone (and the anxiety from it) perhaps firing at end of shift would be best....
-
I worked at a place that would routinely wait to fire people. Sometimes it would be the end of the day,sometimes the end of the week and a couple times they even had the person train their replacement before firing them. There were few that they fired immediately but for the most part they waited.
-
I would think that if you were going to fire someone, you wouldn't want them there any longer than they had to be because (unless it is just a downsizing and not the person's fault) they could continue to do harm. Never a good situation for the fire-er or the fire-ee.
-
No I think it is not ethical to use the person for the day and then fire them. If they are so bad as to be fired then make your decision and do it then. Maybe the supervisor could take the fired person's place for the day.
-
No I think it is not ethical to use the person for the day and then fire them. If they are so bad as to be fired then make your decision and do it then. Maybe the supervisor could take the fired person's place for the day.
LOL. Yeah that will happen.