2 weeks notice and termination (resign, review, employees, companies)
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.
he should have given notice only to the agency. when you sign up with these scheisters, you really need to read the fine print on all of the paperwork they hand you and have you sign as well. It probably mentions something about resigning and giving notice. Of course the agency should have paid 2 weeks if notice was given to THEM. I'm curious what the fine print says.
So, my friend argued to his staffing company(A) to get full two weeks payroll, but company A refused to pay two weeks, but agreed to pay just one week since Client(B) pays one week. Also A said if my friend wanted to be paid more, need to get time card approval from B, but it's impossible, because B won't sign it.
So, what I think now is EVEN THOUGH contractor notify ONLY his staffing company his resignation two weeks earlier, but the result should be same IF client company terminate during two weeks.
What else possible good result comes out?
If contractor tells ONLY to staffing firm, then the staffing company holds the news and not telling to their client B until two weeks end?? No way, 99%, I think A will notify B immediately. Why? they don't want to lose the relationship with their client.
Now, not paying full two weeks payroll is illegal or not? I don't know, maybe it's legal since employment with A is 'at will'.
he should have given notice only to the agency. when you sign up with these scheisters, you really need to read the fine print on all of the paperwork they hand you and have you sign as well. It probably mentions something about resigning and giving notice. Of course the agency should have paid 2 weeks if notice was given to THEM. I'm curious what the fine print says.
he should have given notice only to the agency.
==> if he does give the notice only to the agency, but the result could be same....
what makes it difference??
as soon as someone tells something to the client company, the people there are going to snitch to the staffing agency. They're paying the agency $, that's who they're going to side with, not the worker. Worker = commodity. Why oh why would you want to give the client company notice...of course they're going to run back to the agency.
Exactly. It's bad enough when a temp/contract worker will be removed by the agency if someone at the company they're placed at doesn't like them. The agency ALWAYS side with company because that is their client, they could care less about the person they placed there.
But you certainly don't tell the company anything you don't want going right back to the agency.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeCool64
So, my friend argued to his staffing company(A) to get full two weeks payroll, but company A refused to pay two weeks, but agreed to pay just one week since Client(B) pays one week. Also A said if my friend wanted to be paid more, need to get time card approval from B, but it's impossible, because B won't sign it.
So, what I think now is EVEN THOUGH contractor notify ONLY his staffing company his resignation two weeks earlier, but the result should be same IF client company terminate during two weeks.
What else possible good result comes out?
If contractor tells ONLY to staffing firm, then the staffing company holds the news and not telling to their client B until two weeks end?? No way, 99%, I think A will notify B immediately. Why? they don't want to lose the relationship with their client.
Now, not paying full two weeks payroll is illegal or not? I don't know, maybe it's legal since employment with A is 'at will'.
Your friend screwed up, he should have given at the most one weeks notice to the staffing agency only. They would need a few days to find a replacement for him. They don't want to leave a gap, shorting their client.
If he told them on a Monday, it might take the agency say till Thursday to line up a replacement. So they may have told him on Thursday evening, don't come back on Friday. He would have only been shorted a day's pay.
Agencies are the worst as others have stated. It's not uncommon for someone to complete a long term assignment, they're told the assignment is over, they go to file for UE benefits because they're not offered a new assignment and the temp agency tries to fight paying UE, even though they're the ones who told the temp don't come back on Monday.
Staffing companies just plain suck. I've always done better on my own and I'm currently looking for work and will be damned if I'll ever go the staffing company route again. May they all burn in eternal hell.
Well workin in da oil field get a big chuckle out of this. A.) They never give u a notice, bout a hour before end of shift, oh yea ure getting layed off today, lol. B.) Give a week notice only if u like ure boss, if not just drag up, course in my business it really doesn't much matter, lol. If u don't get laid off in this business ure kissin way too much arse anyway, lol.
Many companies, turn 2 weeks notice into an immediate termination either employees or staffing agency employees. And they don't pay beyond the last day worked. This is especially true, for people working in offices, etc. They have found that once the employee gives notice, they no longer have the employers best interest in their thinking. This has been going on for the 60 past years I have been around the work place. They probably let the OP go, when they were given notice by the staffing agency t he OP was leaving.
As they were working with the staffing agency to provide employees, they just replaced the person as soon as they had a new employee available. When one is available they need to put them to work, and the OP was no longer needed, so they were let go.
They need to keep one person employed, and when one is leaving they replace them as soon as possible. If they wait the full 2 weeks, the replacement may be working somewhere else and no replacement available. Any smart company will work this way, as this may be the only way to keep the position filled. Their responsibility is to keep the company operating, not to keep the old temp employee working after they have given notice they are leaving.
That's fine then be sure to put that into the employee handbook or contract. To pull the rug up on someone like that is despicable and possibly grounds for a lawsuit.
It all depends on the "contract". If there is no termination date in the contract, the company may end his association with them at any time, paying up through his last date of work. Even full-time employees can be terminated with no notice. Many companies, as a matter of course, give terminated employees two weeks severance, but depending upon your state, it may not be required. As long as they pay any owed monies (for time worked, accrued vacation, etc.) they're good. As a contractor, if you want notice, you have to put that in your contract. Technically, they way you described the situation, your friend works for the staffing agency, and they loaned him out to company B, for which they were being paid. The company simply didn't want to keep paying someone who was leaving and probably just had an agency send them someone else who would be there awhile.
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.
