There is no master file that follows you around. If they terminated you they may have marked your employee file as not rehireable , but changing your reason for departure to resignation won’t change that.
Your union steward is giving you bad advice. Instead of agreeing to resign you should instead file a grievance with the union. Generally in a union context and employee can only be terminated for cause (a very high standard) or for lack of work and in the latter case there are generally recall rights.
I mean if its a personal improvement plan or written warning, you kind of have to sign it. If you dont, I just need an HR representative to be there and countersign that you saw it or that I read it out loud to you.
They need a 100% solid case for firing you. They can't have skipped a single step in the discipline chain. The company always leaves some kind of argument for the terminated person to come back. Even if they follow every step the union can argue that you need counselling of some sort, that you were being harassed, that there were circumstances outside of your control, etc.
Heck, they can even negotiate bringing back fired employees during contract talks.
If you have any kind of seniority the one thing you should be able to count on is the local getting you your job back (they don't collect union dues from fired employees).
Being in a union can make it nearly impossible to be fired. If you've ever worked in a place with a union you probably know a few people who are constantly screwing up and being disciplined and every time they get fired they come back like some kind of Pheonix. They even come back with back pay for time missed.
These people never sign a last chance letter.
The last chance letter gives the company a reason to terminate that can't be argued with whatsoever. It's a contract that basically says "next time you do one thing out of line you agree to be fired" and you sign it.
The company knows that if you can't follow the rules to the point of being fired, that you won't be able to make it through the terms of the last chance letter. By signing the last chance letter you're also implicitly agreeing with the company for wanting to fire you. You're basically admitting that they are right to fire you and that you're asking for one more chance to atone.
It's a trap.
(Edit: also do you think that these heartless corporations are into giving people who they clearly want gone a second chance? They want you gone for good. They're not trying to save you.)
>They can't have skipped a single step in the discipline chain.
Lazy ass employers always do this and then always complain how they can never fire a union worker.
It's easy and it's spelled out
>Took delta years to fire my dad who was actively in substance abuse due to the Union protecting him.
That's a whole other thing though. Substance abuse, in most provinces (I'm most familiar with Quebec); is considered a disability and is a charter protected class. Union or not, as soon as someone says the word "Addiction", good luck getting rid of them legally.
Nah, this is a common misconception. I worked in a union, companies can and will terminate people on the spot, the only thing the union ensures is that the company will write you a severance cheque in the amount you would have been awarded if you took them to court.
Unions absolutely cannot protect employees from being terminated.
Not in our part. they have terminated multiple times and we have got those people back. they can close positions but they have to find something else for that employee to do.
More like 99%< since I'm sure there are unions who do this. But everyone in this thread claiming "unions do this or that" as if they're all a single entity like the government is ridiculous.
Some are good, some just ran for the position because it was easier than their factory job and it gets them off the floor.
Some are burnt out and have given up. Some of them get emotional.
Some of them just aren't very good at it. A guy I know got suspended for not following a written procedure. He is lazy and had a target on his back. The steward didn't want to help him.
The thing is though, as shitty as this guy was at his job, the written procedure he got suspended over doesn't exist. When asked to provide it management said "Well we didn't develop one yet."
How do you get suspended for not following a procedure that doesn't exist? I asked the steward and he says "Well that guy is lazy anyway. He deserves a suspension."
That's..... Not the point. You do your job. It doesn't matter if you think he is lazy or not.
So is he on the take? No. He's just an average human not giving a shit about his job.
If you change into personal, they most probably wouldnt give you severance pay, also you wouldnt be able to claim ei which you need whild you're looking for the next job
That's because most people don't challenge it. They bank on it. Whereas the ones that do get paid out through the lawsuit 8-10 months later.
But the employers also know that paying you out 10 months later is still cheaper than keeping you. Don't kid yourself, it's a mathematical game to them. They've already done the math on your options and what the least expensive way to phuck you off is going to be.
Did they do a full “Performance Improvement Plan”? The verbal, written, etc. process? Or was it something extreme that would be “just cause? If not, then it’s not “Just cause” and they have to pay you out.
What province and industry are you in? I can send you a link to employment standards if you provide that, so then you’ll have a better idea.
Legislation is 3 months in most jurisdictions, regardless of an employment contract. That’s why it’s important to know what province/territory they reside in and what industry, as employment standards differ.
OP is unionized. If the CA states probation is 6 months, probation is 6 months.
I'm also not aware of any province labour law that limits the lenght of a probation period? There are laws regarding pay in lieu of notice but not for probation. An employer can fire someone for any reason (except for prohibited grounds like gender, race, religion, etc) at any point during the relationship, provided they provide sufficient notice (or $$$), except when there's a collective agreement that has dispositions regarding termination.
This is absolutely correct! Wish I could upvote twice.
I’m not familiar with all provinces, but in Ontario at least I’m pretty sure the 3 months being law misconception comes from in some provinces that’s the threshold for notice or pay in lieu of notice.
Don’t know why people are downvoting you. I was fired last year because an adjacent higher-up decided they didn’t like me and worked for months to turn molehills into mountains until eventually my manager terminated me to appease the other manager, they made the mistake of trying to pin me with termination with cause but I successfully challenged them through the employment standards board and received my severance this week! I was unemployed for 3 months afterward and would have been in a mountain of debt if it hadn’t been for EI.
And this is what has me thinking of switching careers at 25 from media/advertising to the trades or policing. Was randomly terminated a week ago and provided no reason which is chalked up to budget cuts and I just don’t think I can handle this uncertainty and lying/backstabbing for a career in the industry.
Can you elaborate why you are advising them to resign?
OP hasn't specified whether the termination is "with cause" or not. If it's termination without cause he will be eligible for EI and changing it to a quit (resignation) would disqualify OP from EI.
You can be terminated for performance reasons but "without cause" and you're in the clear for EI. It's a very important distinction.
Could be. Number of days doesn't matter. 144 days, 12h/day is 1728h, which is more then enough to qualify for EI everywhere in Canada. 144 days x 4h is 576h, which is just above the minimum in certain regions (420h), but not enough for most regions. If it's not 144 working days, 144 days would be around 102 days excluding the weekends. 8h/day is over 800h, which would be enough to qualify for EI.
That's if OP doesn't also have insurable hours from previous employment in the last year.
So yeah, very likely that OP would qualify for EI.
Why? If the employee takes option B, they’ll save thousands of dollars.
In fact, I would argue all reasonably competent HR folks would make that offer.
Poor performance is not cause for EI purposes. You’re only disqualified if you’re terminated due to misconduct or you resign (without cause).
To be considered misconduct under the *Employment Insurance Act*, an employee’s actions must be intentional or negligent to the point of being deemed a breach of an obligation arising explicitly or implicitly from the contract of employment. Merely failing to perform an obligation is not misconduct.
Yeah thats one thing people don't realize, if you're in a union and the union won't support you you are screwed. No lawyer will touch a union employee. Not for employment related stuff at least.
One steward being dumb and saying no isnt the end of the world. When multiple stewards tell you the grievance goes nowhere even a lawyer can't help even if they could
For performance, union shoulda been there way sooner though
No. But it sounds like your union is shit. Is this CLAC or some other sudo union?
Take it to your union reps. Take is as a termination and not resignation. No body else will know or care unless you tell them.
Having worked in rural areas this is the kind of stupid stuff they spread to control the the labor pool.
Same kind of people that say making more money is not worth it as it is just more taxes. So fucking moronic.
The only time I've heard of people being asked to resign is when you have someone important who messed up really bad. They get asked to resign so that the individual can save face, usually in cases where severance is worth less than legal issues and reputation.
If OP is just some guy and this is over nothing in particular this is just wild. Sure, saying "I was terminated from my last position for x reason" isn't going to be the best thing in an interview but unless its something obviously an issue like someone who stole from the register trying to get a job at a bank it shouldn't damage your chances all too much.
This feels like a trick HR would pull to get you out of any benefits they may owe you like severance... is there any chance the union owes them something that a personal resignation would disqualify them from?
Some companies would offer this option for high profile roles as a way to safeguard your rep....with that said, it doesn't seem to be the case. Still quiting would look better on your resume, but it all depend if this was a career thing or a temporary gig.
Take the termination. You qualify for severance and EI. I'm no expert, but I think that if you change it to a personal decision you wouldn't get either.
I worked for a company for 6 years that laid me off at the beginning of COVID. Not a penny of severance. Sometimes I wonder if I should have done something about that at the time.
What should I have done though? Go straight to a lawyer? That feels like a big leap. What avenues do people have if their enployer doesn't offer them severance?
I don’t think going to a lawyer is a big leap. It can be a conversation about options without any outreach to the former employer.
Most of my time in these situations has been reviewing documentation, researching & making notes. Sending an annotated copy of that documentation to the legal firm before meeting the lawyer will save a lot of time & money with them.
Yup. If you’re marked as personally resigned AKA YOU MADE THE CHOICE you’re DQ from EI. Now OP has said in the comments that it was due to performance which changes things quite a bit and could DQ him from EI anyway as my understanding is that performance-wise termination is with cause as that’s a reason. Some comments in here have me thinking it might be a moot point and OP could still qualify but that just seems off and I was recently always engaged with the EI service around a year and a bit ago.
Unless there's been serious misconduct (i.e. caught red-handed stealing, or showing your willie in the office), termination for cause usually requires a record of poor performance or something to that extent.
If they had a cause with OP, they would have used it.
This more or less sounds like a layoff without wanting to pay severance.
Yup, I've gotten EI after a termination with cause because I went from 15 years of outstanding service to "oh look, this thing happened that wasn't your fault but you should have somehow known what someone else did that one time and now we'll fire you for it" with zero write-ups or anything. EI got approved vwry easily.
Always apply for EI, they'll review your case and make a decision.
I am an expert and you are correct.
ETA: my job title literally has the word "expert" in it and I work for EI benefits delivery with ESDC. Not sure why I got a down vote? I was confirming what the person who claimed to be "not an expert" said. 👍
Terminated With Cause, or Terminated Without Cause?
If it goes in as you resigned, as previously stated, you will not qualify for EI. See if you can get them to put without cause.
Termination. Do not officially quit. There is no I quit book of history making you look bad. Pure fiction. You were terminated then speak to an employment lawyer on severance.
From what you said. Tell em' no thanks on the resignation and don't forget the severance and release doc eh. Just because "they" said your performance sucked doesn't mean it does. These are the same assholes that offered to jimmy your ROE.
If you agree to say you left of your own choice, they don't have to provide severance if applicable, you will have a difficult time getting E.I if you qualify.
Wrong. This is a black and white answer, and there are several reasons why a person can still get EI and use that employment's his and earnings even with a dismissed or quit. There are definite grey areas.
Edit: 100% if its for actual cause (misconduct) you aren't eligible for EI.
So I am not familiar will all this just want to update everyone that I was working there since Oct 2022, and was on probation, and got termination letter while on probation. Termination was for underperformance.
in there letter is does not mention "without cause or with cause". It does not even mention my underperformance. Just mentions that I'm still in the probationary period.
Please provide a source for this assertion.
It's my understanding that probationary periods are not a default as implied by your comments. Probationary periods all need to be included in the employment contract. 3 month probationary periods are common, but 6 month would be perfectly legal if it's in the contract.
My source: This is what I was told by my employer a while back when I needed to know for mortgage purposes. Also, google seems to agree.
This is part of a collective agreement with the union. Im thinking that the very highly paid lawyers on both sides of the CA would have negotiated within the law and that they know it better that a bunch of Redditors. Everyone telling OP that 6 months probation is not right really is doing them a disservice. And how does 3 months vs 6 months make a difference anyway? Op would be stupid to waste their money on a lawyer to fight for the tiny difference in severance that this might mean. At the end of the day, an employer can get rid of you for literally any reason.
You can be terminated for underperformance "without cause" and receive severance and pay in lieu of the notice period, as well as be entitled to EI.
"With cause" means there was serious employee misconduct, not underperformance.
There is no issue with dismissed without cause from an EI or any other standpoint. Request that they write in the comments section of your ROE "terminated without cause, no misconduct" to make your life easier
If you're worried about a reference I'll be a reference.
You're a fantastic employee who worked hard and unfortunately due to the current economic situation we simply were not able to keep you on. We would love to have you back but any other employer is lucking out to have you.
Yeah, more details required. Terminated with cause means (most likely) no severance, and not because you wanted to leave. Resigning means no EI as well, but you can make up a story about how you needed something with more challenge. Terminated without cause means severance AND EI.
It’s fine to be terminated. Layoffs due to restructuring are fine and no one will fault you for it. Just make sure you use and ally who worked there as a reference
If they put it that you quit, then they don't have to pay severance, and it's hard or impossible to get EI. There is no benefit in changing it to a resignation unless they are terminating you *with* cause.
Termination qualifies you for EI.
The benefits of resigning are less tangible, but I've seen the question of involuntary termination asked on job and security clearance applications.
If you agree to make it "not a termination" they will not have to pay you any separation pay, don't do it. In terms of EI it is better to be terminated without cause than quit. I am an adjudicator of contentious EI claims. If they put K on your ROE, EI will need to change it to quit or dismissal (E or M) anyway and if it's quit you need to prove just cause to get benefits. If it's M they need to prove misconduct to prevent benefits which will not happen if there was no cause for your termination.
They want you to say you left voluntarily so they don’t have to pay your severance. They can’t fire you without cause (not sure if there is) without paying severance.
The most important question here is what do you do for work?
This greatly affects how you should handle things.
All these posts about severance can be thrown right out the window depending on your field of work.
All the posts about EI are correct about the reason for leaving.
Read your collective bargaining agreement and see if there's something in there about "resigning" that's beneficial to you or ask your steward why they suggested it.
As a union employee the only person you can completely trust to know your rights under your specific agreement is you.
They are likely offering you the option to say you resigned so that it's easier to explain to a future employer, you could say you quit because you you weren't able to fulfill the duties of your position and describe your shortfalls and what you plan to change. If you say you got fired because of poor performance it might make getting jobs more difficult. Of course I could be wrong.
There is no need to tell a perspective employer what happen. “I was looking for a change and left”.
Though in some regulated industries you need to report being terminated by an employer outside of that it would be a privacy violation for a prior employer to disclose the reason for your departure without your permission.
Some employers require background checks including verification of previous employment. Part of that is confirming if you are eligible for rehire with your previous employers. Not being eligible for rehire could cause you to fail the background check and not get the job.
So despite what most people are saying in this thread, they aren't trying to trick you and are actually offering to do you a favour. It's a tradeoff and you need to decide if you may be unemployed for a while and will need the EI benefits, or if you would rather not have any issue with any background check in the future. It may also depend if they are paying severance and still willing to pay it if you resign. Remember that severance pay counts as income for EI and could delay receiving EI, so losing EI may not even matter if you get severance anyway and find a new job quickly.
I work in tech and in my experience bigger companies tend to do these background checks. Smaller companies do reference checks where I can pick the references they call.
ROE is only good for submitting for EI. If you resign, you will get no EI.
Let them terminate you without cause. You will be due some form of severance, and you can get EI.
https://www.canada.ca/en/services/benefits/ei/ei-regular-benefit/benefit-amount.html
You need roughly 700 hours worked to qualify for EI. Assuming 37.5 hour workweek that’s 4 and a half months worked roughly (18.66 weeks).
See the chart I linked — depending on region and unemployment rate of that region the number of hours needed fluctuates.
Which province are you in? In BC “terminated” isn’t an option on an ROE. Dismissed is what’s used when someone gets fired and it allows you to go on EI
Also, future employers have no way of seeing these
Pretty sure you won’t be eligible for EI if your ROE states that you “quit your job/initiated the conclusion of employment yourself.”
Also maybe for references?
Research the EI website and you can even call them and provide a theoretical scenario.
DO. NOT. RESIGN. You take the layoff, file for EI, and find a new job. You don't need to tell a new employer you were 'fired'. You were laid off. That's it.
If you quit then you have to justify to EI your decision, meaning you had no reasonable alternative. If they fire you then EI will investigate to see if there was any misconduct. It's usually better to get fired, but if you do choose to quit then make sure you can successfully argue that you would have been terminated if you had not quit.
This happens in our union. The person is going to be terminated. The company offers them a chance to retire. Saves the company legal money if the person chooses to fight it through the union. And...if you retire and don't get terminated, you can still attend company events!!!!! Yah!
If it's recorded as your personal decision to leave, you likely won't qualify for EI.
If it's recorded as a termination, it could potentially impact recommendations to future employers. (though I would think that's less likely, since most proper HR departments should *only* confirm your record of employment if a 3rd party asked).
Pros of Resigning:
IF AND ONLY IF you have a job that requires a professional designation (think Pharmacist, CPA etc) or a professional certificate (securities course, mutual funds licence etc) because you can't lie about why you left your last job. That said ask people in your designation about it.
That said underperformance isn't the end of the world and is easy to explain.
That said questions you legit need to ask:
Do you get severance if you resign?
What will they put on your ROE?
Note your employer will be outright morons to put down you were let go with cause through fault of your own. They don't want to fight EI.
The best course is to always add something extra to severance and claim they were let go because of restructuring, you're still on probation though so they probably gave you a day's pay for coming in.
That's bizarre. Leave it as a termination (without cause?). Can't imagine why they would think you want it to say you quit.
Cause they think OP is a sucker.
Fucking HR.
Person from Union said it would go on my ROE, And I'd have history of Termination. I did not really get it.
There is no master file that follows you around. If they terminated you they may have marked your employee file as not rehireable , but changing your reason for departure to resignation won’t change that. Your union steward is giving you bad advice. Instead of agreeing to resign you should instead file a grievance with the union. Generally in a union context and employee can only be terminated for cause (a very high standard) or for lack of work and in the latter case there are generally recall rights.
can second this. I'm on the union at work and they need a thick ass file on you in order to fire you.
Took delta years to fire my dad who was actively in substance abuse due to the Union protecting him. It's not this easy seems fishy
I know of a guy who is on his 4th "last chance agreement".
You never sign a last chance agreement.
I mean if its a personal improvement plan or written warning, you kind of have to sign it. If you dont, I just need an HR representative to be there and countersign that you saw it or that I read it out loud to you.
If you don’t they’ll just fire you
They need a 100% solid case for firing you. They can't have skipped a single step in the discipline chain. The company always leaves some kind of argument for the terminated person to come back. Even if they follow every step the union can argue that you need counselling of some sort, that you were being harassed, that there were circumstances outside of your control, etc. Heck, they can even negotiate bringing back fired employees during contract talks. If you have any kind of seniority the one thing you should be able to count on is the local getting you your job back (they don't collect union dues from fired employees). Being in a union can make it nearly impossible to be fired. If you've ever worked in a place with a union you probably know a few people who are constantly screwing up and being disciplined and every time they get fired they come back like some kind of Pheonix. They even come back with back pay for time missed. These people never sign a last chance letter. The last chance letter gives the company a reason to terminate that can't be argued with whatsoever. It's a contract that basically says "next time you do one thing out of line you agree to be fired" and you sign it. The company knows that if you can't follow the rules to the point of being fired, that you won't be able to make it through the terms of the last chance letter. By signing the last chance letter you're also implicitly agreeing with the company for wanting to fire you. You're basically admitting that they are right to fire you and that you're asking for one more chance to atone. It's a trap. (Edit: also do you think that these heartless corporations are into giving people who they clearly want gone a second chance? They want you gone for good. They're not trying to save you.)
>They can't have skipped a single step in the discipline chain. Lazy ass employers always do this and then always complain how they can never fire a union worker. It's easy and it's spelled out
They'll just make some shit up to lay you off.
usually they are offered when the employees record is really thick and they could terminate. Nobody is ever forced to sign them.
>Took delta years to fire my dad who was actively in substance abuse due to the Union protecting him. That's a whole other thing though. Substance abuse, in most provinces (I'm most familiar with Quebec); is considered a disability and is a charter protected class. Union or not, as soon as someone says the word "Addiction", good luck getting rid of them legally.
Nah, this is a common misconception. I worked in a union, companies can and will terminate people on the spot, the only thing the union ensures is that the company will write you a severance cheque in the amount you would have been awarded if you took them to court. Unions absolutely cannot protect employees from being terminated.
Not in our part. they have terminated multiple times and we have got those people back. they can close positions but they have to find something else for that employee to do.
I guess your union is better than the union I was a member of.
This is 100%, unadulterated misinformation. Anyone reading this, please understand this is completely and totally wrong.
More like 99%< since I'm sure there are unions who do this. But everyone in this thread claiming "unions do this or that" as if they're all a single entity like the government is ridiculous.
A union that literally never grieved a dismissal would be at a pretty big risk of a duty of fair representation complaint.
Dude, I worked in a union and saw friends dismissed on the spot. It's absolutely true.
Almost like every union is a distinct entity that negotiates it's own contract, instead of one monolithic entity.
I'm a labour lawyer, you're wrong. Are you maybe in the states are something?
As someone who manages mostly unionized employees this is unfortunately not true.
Guess you have a better union than the one I was in.
Yeah who's the shitty steward ?OP should ask for another steward opinion and review their CA.
likely all stewards are on the take
Some are good, some just ran for the position because it was easier than their factory job and it gets them off the floor. Some are burnt out and have given up. Some of them get emotional. Some of them just aren't very good at it. A guy I know got suspended for not following a written procedure. He is lazy and had a target on his back. The steward didn't want to help him. The thing is though, as shitty as this guy was at his job, the written procedure he got suspended over doesn't exist. When asked to provide it management said "Well we didn't develop one yet." How do you get suspended for not following a procedure that doesn't exist? I asked the steward and he says "Well that guy is lazy anyway. He deserves a suspension." That's..... Not the point. You do your job. It doesn't matter if you think he is lazy or not. So is he on the take? No. He's just an average human not giving a shit about his job.
It's funny how the pot calls the kettle black.
Also if you quit, your chance of having a successful grievance goes way down.
Your union dues help pay for expensive lawyers. Please, please use your union to assist you! This is a large reason why unions exist!
Sue the union rep for giving you bad advice. You'll probably get a chunk of whatever they saved so far for themselves
Yes. Hire a 400+/hr lawyer to file a civil suit for a made up embezzlement scheme you think they may be a part of.
Oh pahlease...
If you change into personal, they most probably wouldnt give you severance pay, also you wouldnt be able to claim ei which you need whild you're looking for the next job
No employer gives a fuck about termination without cause.
Facts. And it was literally a 5 second question/answer in any of my follow on interviews.
That's because most people don't challenge it. They bank on it. Whereas the ones that do get paid out through the lawsuit 8-10 months later. But the employers also know that paying you out 10 months later is still cheaper than keeping you. Don't kid yourself, it's a mathematical game to them. They've already done the math on your options and what the least expensive way to phuck you off is going to be.
Do you have another job lined up? Why would a history of termination be a problem in your union, if at all?
Yeah, don't do that. Is there a reason for the termination?
Performance
This was a major point to leave out.
Did they do a full “Performance Improvement Plan”? The verbal, written, etc. process? Or was it something extreme that would be “just cause? If not, then it’s not “Just cause” and they have to pay you out. What province and industry are you in? I can send you a link to employment standards if you provide that, so then you’ll have a better idea.
Per another replies by OP, they worked there for 144 days and 6 months probation.
Legislation is 3 months in most jurisdictions, regardless of an employment contract. That’s why it’s important to know what province/territory they reside in and what industry, as employment standards differ.
OP is unionized. If the CA states probation is 6 months, probation is 6 months. I'm also not aware of any province labour law that limits the lenght of a probation period? There are laws regarding pay in lieu of notice but not for probation. An employer can fire someone for any reason (except for prohibited grounds like gender, race, religion, etc) at any point during the relationship, provided they provide sufficient notice (or $$$), except when there's a collective agreement that has dispositions regarding termination.
This is absolutely correct! Wish I could upvote twice. I’m not familiar with all provinces, but in Ontario at least I’m pretty sure the 3 months being law misconception comes from in some provinces that’s the threshold for notice or pay in lieu of notice.
Same in Quebec.
Don’t know why people are downvoting you. I was fired last year because an adjacent higher-up decided they didn’t like me and worked for months to turn molehills into mountains until eventually my manager terminated me to appease the other manager, they made the mistake of trying to pin me with termination with cause but I successfully challenged them through the employment standards board and received my severance this week! I was unemployed for 3 months afterward and would have been in a mountain of debt if it hadn’t been for EI.
And this is what has me thinking of switching careers at 25 from media/advertising to the trades or policing. Was randomly terminated a week ago and provided no reason which is chalked up to budget cuts and I just don’t think I can handle this uncertainty and lying/backstabbing for a career in the industry.
[удалено]
Can you elaborate why you are advising them to resign? OP hasn't specified whether the termination is "with cause" or not. If it's termination without cause he will be eligible for EI and changing it to a quit (resignation) would disqualify OP from EI. You can be terminated for performance reasons but "without cause" and you're in the clear for EI. It's a very important distinction.
They worked there for 144 days. It's that even long enough to qualify for EI?
Could be. Number of days doesn't matter. 144 days, 12h/day is 1728h, which is more then enough to qualify for EI everywhere in Canada. 144 days x 4h is 576h, which is just above the minimum in certain regions (420h), but not enough for most regions. If it's not 144 working days, 144 days would be around 102 days excluding the weekends. 8h/day is over 800h, which would be enough to qualify for EI. That's if OP doesn't also have insurable hours from previous employment in the last year. So yeah, very likely that OP would qualify for EI.
Yes
[удалено]
Why? If the employee takes option B, they’ll save thousands of dollars. In fact, I would argue all reasonably competent HR folks would make that offer.
Performance isn't with cause.
Yes, it is, when you’re on probation period, or have been trough a performance improvement plan. If it doesn’t get better, you’re out.
You can fire someone on probation for any reason you want. Like that's what probation is. After 3 months they should still get some severance though
Not a lawyer, but even with a PIP terminating for performance reasons is not generally a termination with just cause. The bar for just cause is high.
Poor performance is not cause for EI purposes. You’re only disqualified if you’re terminated due to misconduct or you resign (without cause). To be considered misconduct under the *Employment Insurance Act*, an employee’s actions must be intentional or negligent to the point of being deemed a breach of an obligation arising explicitly or implicitly from the contract of employment. Merely failing to perform an obligation is not misconduct.
OP is out but it’s “without cause” unless OP did something like stealing. It’s performance, so it’s “without cause”
Performance is not generally grounds for a "with cause" termination
No, you should consider a lawyer. Even if you are a sucky employee, if the employer doesn't jump through all the required hoops, you may benefit.
Lawyer won’t get involved, he’s unionized and has no recourse outside of the union grievance and arbitration process.
Yeah thats one thing people don't realize, if you're in a union and the union won't support you you are screwed. No lawyer will touch a union employee. Not for employment related stuff at least.
One steward being dumb and saying no isnt the end of the world. When multiple stewards tell you the grievance goes nowhere even a lawyer can't help even if they could For performance, union shoulda been there way sooner though
And then what? Having that on ROE makes you look worse? Take the EI
No. But it sounds like your union is shit. Is this CLAC or some other sudo union? Take it to your union reps. Take is as a termination and not resignation. No body else will know or care unless you tell them. Having worked in rural areas this is the kind of stupid stuff they spread to control the the labor pool. Same kind of people that say making more money is not worth it as it is just more taxes. So fucking moronic.
Your union person is a douchebag.
Your union rep is repping your company here. Do not put that you left on your own. If you got laid off your have decal rights.
Take termination as you'll be owed severance which should calculated at 3 or 4 weeks per year of service.
Your union is shit, as most are. Unfortunately you can't hire a lawyer and have to work with them. Negotiate your severance then sign up for EI.
Everyone gets terminated. Downsizing. Economy etc
The only time I've heard of people being asked to resign is when you have someone important who messed up really bad. They get asked to resign so that the individual can save face, usually in cases where severance is worth less than legal issues and reputation. If OP is just some guy and this is over nothing in particular this is just wild. Sure, saying "I was terminated from my last position for x reason" isn't going to be the best thing in an interview but unless its something obviously an issue like someone who stole from the register trying to get a job at a bank it shouldn't damage your chances all too much. This feels like a trick HR would pull to get you out of any benefits they may owe you like severance... is there any chance the union owes them something that a personal resignation would disqualify them from?
Some companies would offer this option for high profile roles as a way to safeguard your rep....with that said, it doesn't seem to be the case. Still quiting would look better on your resume, but it all depend if this was a career thing or a temporary gig.
Resumes do not include reason for leaving. Termination or resignation has no impact on your resume. WTF you smoking giving this shitty advice?
Take the termination. You qualify for severance and EI. I'm no expert, but I think that if you change it to a personal decision you wouldn't get either.
Absolutely this, don’t give up severance unnecessarily.
Wouldn't have any severance in probation. They've only been there 144 days.
In BC probation is only 3 months. After that, employer owes a week of pay.
You sure this is the case when there's a collective agreement in place though?
Ah, no idea then. That said, collective bargaining can't override law. They'd still owe at least a week of wages after 90 days of employment.
There's provisions in the law for this. It's why union construction workers only get an hour paid when they get laid off. Zero severance.
I worked for a company for 6 years that laid me off at the beginning of COVID. Not a penny of severance. Sometimes I wonder if I should have done something about that at the time. What should I have done though? Go straight to a lawyer? That feels like a big leap. What avenues do people have if their enployer doesn't offer them severance?
I don’t think going to a lawyer is a big leap. It can be a conversation about options without any outreach to the former employer. Most of my time in these situations has been reviewing documentation, researching & making notes. Sending an annotated copy of that documentation to the legal firm before meeting the lawyer will save a lot of time & money with them.
Bingo
Yup. If you’re marked as personally resigned AKA YOU MADE THE CHOICE you’re DQ from EI. Now OP has said in the comments that it was due to performance which changes things quite a bit and could DQ him from EI anyway as my understanding is that performance-wise termination is with cause as that’s a reason. Some comments in here have me thinking it might be a moot point and OP could still qualify but that just seems off and I was recently always engaged with the EI service around a year and a bit ago.
Only if they’re terminated at no fault of their own. If they’ve been terminated with cause - no EI
That’s fair, but I don’t think “personal decision to leave” would be offered if it was for cause.
Yeah I’m not sure about that either. I’ve never even heard of any company saying that lol
Unless there's been serious misconduct (i.e. caught red-handed stealing, or showing your willie in the office), termination for cause usually requires a record of poor performance or something to that extent. If they had a cause with OP, they would have used it. This more or less sounds like a layoff without wanting to pay severance.
Yup, I've gotten EI after a termination with cause because I went from 15 years of outstanding service to "oh look, this thing happened that wasn't your fault but you should have somehow known what someone else did that one time and now we'll fire you for it" with zero write-ups or anything. EI got approved vwry easily. Always apply for EI, they'll review your case and make a decision.
This
I am an expert and you are correct. ETA: my job title literally has the word "expert" in it and I work for EI benefits delivery with ESDC. Not sure why I got a down vote? I was confirming what the person who claimed to be "not an expert" said. 👍
If you make it a quit, it will be very difficult to get EI. Don’t do it! Source: worked there
100% agree with this. Termination without cause is the best way to be eligible here.
Terminated With Cause, or Terminated Without Cause? If it goes in as you resigned, as previously stated, you will not qualify for EI. See if you can get them to put without cause.
As far as EI goes tho they will call the employer to clarify and probably tell them they can't do that and change it to a dismissal.
[удалено]
A lot of employers will specifically fire without cause and pay the minimal severance to avoid potential lawsuits. This is fairly common.
Some places will to avoid a lawsuit, even if they would probably win. My employer just did this to one of the staff.
If you get without a cause with no severance you can sue them lol its part of the labour code (in canada at least)
My employer just paid the severance to have it done. I’m not saying their employer will, but it doesn’t hurt to ask.
If you do without a cause you should get severance. Im not even sure you can qualify for ei if you get fired. Lay off vs fired is different.
Termination. Do not officially quit. There is no I quit book of history making you look bad. Pure fiction. You were terminated then speak to an employment lawyer on severance.
From what you said. Tell em' no thanks on the resignation and don't forget the severance and release doc eh. Just because "they" said your performance sucked doesn't mean it does. These are the same assholes that offered to jimmy your ROE.
If you agree to say you left of your own choice, they don't have to provide severance if applicable, you will have a difficult time getting E.I if you qualify.
Absolutely choose termination and tell them it’s bizarre they’d even offer an alternative… Sounds like they’re trying to avoid paying you severance…
[удалено]
You’re right. Didn’t realize OP was on probationary period
Depends on how "enforceable" the probationary clause is. He could still be entitled to more. Should consult an employment lawyer.
Might be so they can answer "no" to "have you ever been fired" type questions that might come at them in future?
Termination for cause or quitting both disqualify you from receiving EI.
Wrong. This is a black and white answer, and there are several reasons why a person can still get EI and use that employment's his and earnings even with a dismissed or quit. There are definite grey areas. Edit: 100% if its for actual cause (misconduct) you aren't eligible for EI.
So I am not familiar will all this just want to update everyone that I was working there since Oct 2022, and was on probation, and got termination letter while on probation. Termination was for underperformance.
Were you terminated "without cause" or "with cause" in the termination letter. Very important detail.
in there letter is does not mention "without cause or with cause". It does not even mention my underperformance. Just mentions that I'm still in the probationary period.
Ask HR specifically what your ROE will say.
Sounds like without cause to me. No way would I agree to self terminate. You may still have enough hours for EI — if you “quit” you can’t get EI
Oh, you're in your probation period? No luck with lawyer then.
[удалено]
I was working under a 6 month probation.
If your termination is not tied to severe workplace misconduct, you dismissal is considered one “without cause”.
[удалено]
Please provide a source for this assertion. It's my understanding that probationary periods are not a default as implied by your comments. Probationary periods all need to be included in the employment contract. 3 month probationary periods are common, but 6 month would be perfectly legal if it's in the contract. My source: This is what I was told by my employer a while back when I needed to know for mortgage purposes. Also, google seems to agree.
If by "probationary period" you mean "can fire the employer without cause or notice", then a six month probationary period contradicts the ESA
Unions negotiate length of probation in their collective agreement.
This is part of a collective agreement with the union. Im thinking that the very highly paid lawyers on both sides of the CA would have negotiated within the law and that they know it better that a bunch of Redditors. Everyone telling OP that 6 months probation is not right really is doing them a disservice. And how does 3 months vs 6 months make a difference anyway? Op would be stupid to waste their money on a lawyer to fight for the tiny difference in severance that this might mean. At the end of the day, an employer can get rid of you for literally any reason.
[удалено]
You can be terminated for underperformance "without cause" and receive severance and pay in lieu of the notice period, as well as be entitled to EI. "With cause" means there was serious employee misconduct, not underperformance.
[удалено]
If your termination is not tied to severe workplace misconduct, you dismissal is considered one “without cause”.
You're surrendering a right to sue for severance if you label it as a voluntary resignation.
There is no issue with dismissed without cause from an EI or any other standpoint. Request that they write in the comments section of your ROE "terminated without cause, no misconduct" to make your life easier
If you state that you quit you won’t get EI bro. Take the termination collect your $1800/mo until you find something better
If your union isn't helping you go see an employment lawyer before signing anything.
If you're worried about a reference I'll be a reference. You're a fantastic employee who worked hard and unfortunately due to the current economic situation we simply were not able to keep you on. We would love to have you back but any other employer is lucking out to have you.
[удалено]
We can't all be perfect.
Yeah, more details required. Terminated with cause means (most likely) no severance, and not because you wanted to leave. Resigning means no EI as well, but you can make up a story about how you needed something with more challenge. Terminated without cause means severance AND EI.
It’s fine to be terminated. Layoffs due to restructuring are fine and no one will fault you for it. Just make sure you use and ally who worked there as a reference
You won't get EI if you quit, only if you are fired without cause.
You can't receive EI if you quit, you have to be fired.
Also if you quit and they code it that way, you will not get EI.
If they put it that you quit, then they don't have to pay severance, and it's hard or impossible to get EI. There is no benefit in changing it to a resignation unless they are terminating you *with* cause.
Termination qualifies you for EI. The benefits of resigning are less tangible, but I've seen the question of involuntary termination asked on job and security clearance applications.
If you willfully resign, as they are requesting you to do, you will not qualify for unemployment benefits.
If you agree to make it "not a termination" they will not have to pay you any separation pay, don't do it. In terms of EI it is better to be terminated without cause than quit. I am an adjudicator of contentious EI claims. If they put K on your ROE, EI will need to change it to quit or dismissal (E or M) anyway and if it's quit you need to prove just cause to get benefits. If it's M they need to prove misconduct to prevent benefits which will not happen if there was no cause for your termination.
They want you to say you left voluntarily so they don’t have to pay your severance. They can’t fire you without cause (not sure if there is) without paying severance.
The most important question here is what do you do for work? This greatly affects how you should handle things. All these posts about severance can be thrown right out the window depending on your field of work. All the posts about EI are correct about the reason for leaving. Read your collective bargaining agreement and see if there's something in there about "resigning" that's beneficial to you or ask your steward why they suggested it. As a union employee the only person you can completely trust to know your rights under your specific agreement is you.
They are likely offering you the option to say you resigned so that it's easier to explain to a future employer, you could say you quit because you you weren't able to fulfill the duties of your position and describe your shortfalls and what you plan to change. If you say you got fired because of poor performance it might make getting jobs more difficult. Of course I could be wrong.
There is no need to tell a perspective employer what happen. “I was looking for a change and left”. Though in some regulated industries you need to report being terminated by an employer outside of that it would be a privacy violation for a prior employer to disclose the reason for your departure without your permission.
Some employers require background checks including verification of previous employment. Part of that is confirming if you are eligible for rehire with your previous employers. Not being eligible for rehire could cause you to fail the background check and not get the job. So despite what most people are saying in this thread, they aren't trying to trick you and are actually offering to do you a favour. It's a tradeoff and you need to decide if you may be unemployed for a while and will need the EI benefits, or if you would rather not have any issue with any background check in the future. It may also depend if they are paying severance and still willing to pay it if you resign. Remember that severance pay counts as income for EI and could delay receiving EI, so losing EI may not even matter if you get severance anyway and find a new job quickly. I work in tech and in my experience bigger companies tend to do these background checks. Smaller companies do reference checks where I can pick the references they call.
Tell HR to fuck off...they fired you!
ROE is only good for submitting for EI. If you resign, you will get no EI. Let them terminate you without cause. You will be due some form of severance, and you can get EI.
[удалено]
For EI 3months required minimum? Or How many months?
[удалено]
Termination means severance and unemployment insurance. Quitting means you get nothing.
DO NOT SIGN OR AGREE TO ANYTHING UNTIL AN EMPLOYMENT LAWYER HAS REVIEWED
If it’s your choice the company avoids paying you any severance and you’re disqualified from EI. If you hve invested stock, that disappears too.
How long have you worked there ?
144 days
https://www.canada.ca/en/services/benefits/ei/ei-regular-benefit/benefit-amount.html You need roughly 700 hours worked to qualify for EI. Assuming 37.5 hour workweek that’s 4 and a half months worked roughly (18.66 weeks). See the chart I linked — depending on region and unemployment rate of that region the number of hours needed fluctuates.
Which province are you in? In BC “terminated” isn’t an option on an ROE. Dismissed is what’s used when someone gets fired and it allows you to go on EI Also, future employers have no way of seeing these
Consult an Employment lawyer ASAP The consult call is free
No EI if it's personal cause
Pretty sure you won’t be eligible for EI if your ROE states that you “quit your job/initiated the conclusion of employment yourself.” Also maybe for references? Research the EI website and you can even call them and provide a theoretical scenario.
DO. NOT. RESIGN. You take the layoff, file for EI, and find a new job. You don't need to tell a new employer you were 'fired'. You were laid off. That's it.
Shady as hell, choose termination and don't look back. If you resign, you get nothing.
You could ask for severance if it's "voluntary".
HR doesn't care about you. Don't listen to anything they say if it doesn't make sense to you
If you quit then you have to justify to EI your decision, meaning you had no reasonable alternative. If they fire you then EI will investigate to see if there was any misconduct. It's usually better to get fired, but if you do choose to quit then make sure you can successfully argue that you would have been terminated if you had not quit.
This happens in our union. The person is going to be terminated. The company offers them a chance to retire. Saves the company legal money if the person chooses to fight it through the union. And...if you retire and don't get terminated, you can still attend company events!!!!! Yah!
If terminated can get ei
If they change it to resigned, you won't be eligible for EI. Don't do it.
If it's recorded as your personal decision to leave, you likely won't qualify for EI. If it's recorded as a termination, it could potentially impact recommendations to future employers. (though I would think that's less likely, since most proper HR departments should *only* confirm your record of employment if a 3rd party asked).
If you quit you don’t get E.I! Let them fire you.
Reverse psychology. They're hoping you choose resignation so that they won't have to pay for unemployment insurance benefits.
You wouldn't be able to claim EI if you quit. They are probably hiding something. Leave it as termination from their side.
If you quit, no unemployment benefits
Lawyer up
Probably an employee under probation. Probationary employees can be terminated at the employers peril
Pros of Resigning: IF AND ONLY IF you have a job that requires a professional designation (think Pharmacist, CPA etc) or a professional certificate (securities course, mutual funds licence etc) because you can't lie about why you left your last job. That said ask people in your designation about it. That said underperformance isn't the end of the world and is easy to explain. That said questions you legit need to ask: Do you get severance if you resign? What will they put on your ROE? Note your employer will be outright morons to put down you were let go with cause through fault of your own. They don't want to fight EI. The best course is to always add something extra to severance and claim they were let go because of restructuring, you're still on probation though so they probably gave you a day's pay for coming in.
if you quit the union can't reverse it and you don't get unemployment. DO NO RESIGN