Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So I currently work for a company that is made up of 5 doctors. Each doctor has their own office 'team,' but they also share a few employees with other doctors. But we are employees of the company, not the individual doctor. Today the doctor that I work for called me into his office to tell me that the company is officially disbanding in 60 days, and all employees will be laid off. He went on to express that he wants to re-hire his 'team' in a new company that he is starting.
My question is this: Would I be eligible for unemployment if I declined to join him as an employee of his new venture? I know that in this economy I should be grateful for any employment, but the terms of his offer are completely unacceptable and are apparently non-negotiable. I'm located in New York if that makes a difference.
I was really looking for an answer, morality aside. Like I said, I know I should be grateful for any employment. But everyone has limits. The unacceptable parts are a very significant paycut (nearly 30%), relocating the office an additional 40 minutes from my home (increasing my commute to near two hours each way), and mandating additional overtime during the first few transitional months (I already work a 50 hour week, cant take any more time away from my family). Way more responsibility and hours for way less money and a 3.5 hour/day commute don't work for me.
Hence my question. I'm not saying I'm going the unemployment route, simply seeing if it is even an option on my radar because as it stands now I will not be taking this offer either way.
I was really looking for an answer, morality aside.
Huh??? There are good reasons for a quit. You gave none of them in your original post. I wanted to know your reasons because they may very well be valid in terms of qualifying for benefits.. Guess you haven't read any of my other posts or you would know that question was asked for information, only. Nothing else, and certainly not to pass judgment. Or, maybe I misunderstood your comment???
Quote:
Originally Posted by brooklyn1234
The unacceptable parts are a very significant paycut (nearly 30%), relocating the office an additional 40 minutes from my home (increasing my commute to near two hours each way), and mandating additional overtime during the first few transitional months (I already work a 50 hour week, cant take any more time away from my family). Way more responsibility and hours for way less money and a 3.5 hour/day commute don't work for me.
Way less money is good cause in most states.
On the commute, you might want to review this:
Quote:
Transfer of work location to another state is not in itself good cause for leaving employment when the commuting time and distance is not unreasonable and the additional travel expense is provided for. (A.B. 143,483; A-750-1714
The employer's relocation does not afford a claimant good cause, for voluntarily leaving employment when the location is not at an unreasonable distance from the claimant's home, and the employer partially offsets the increased travel cost so that the net commutation cost is not substantially greater. (Matter of Roman, 38 A.D. 2d 890)
However, you do have to attempt to adjust your grievance and be able to prove it before you quit. This is the thing that kills most UI claims in cases like yours.
Also, you can't take this change, and then change your mind. Changing your mind is like taking a job and then quitting because you don't like it. That's never good cause. You either do it, or don't, and then don't look back.
Huh??? There are good reasons for a quit. You gave none of them in your original post. I wanted to know your reasons because they may very well be valid in terms of qualifying for benefits.. Guess you haven't read any of my other posts or you would know that question was asked for information, only. Nothing else, and certainly not to pass judgment. Or, maybe I misunderstood your comment???
Way less money is good cause in most states.
On the commute, you might want to review this:
Your employer is not compensating you for additional travel and you are experiencing a substantial reduction in pay. You should get your benefits.
Ah, I'm sorry I apologize! I'm so used to snarky passive-aggressiveness coming from NYC, lol. I assumed your first comment was intended to be a guilt-trip/judgmental type of thing...It can't be a good sign that I automatically assume that of everyone at this point! My fault.
Anyway, I actually called up a lawyer that I used a couple of years ago for a speeding ticket just to see if I could bounce it off of him, and it turns out his firm handles unemployment disputes as well. He's going to have someone take a look into it for me, but the general consensus was the same as what you guys gave me here. Thanks!!
Post back w/an update, when you have one. It always helps to hear the end of the story.
Thanks.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I assumed your first comment was intended to be a guilt-trip/judgmental type of thing...It can't be a good sign that I automatically assume that of everyone at this point! My fault. 
