Personal Response to Employer Letter of Termination

[harshja]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas

To preface: I have been laid off in the past, in Texas, so I understand I am an at-will employee without any rights to severance or other compensation.

I was laid off 1 week ago without warning. Only my manager and the owner were present at the termination interview. During the interview, the manager gave the following reasons for my termination:

1. I was hired as an "experimental" employee. Generally the company hires engineers w/ 20+ years experience in this specific industry. In my case, I have 5 years general engineering experience, but had none specific to this industry.
2. The owner fully admitted the experiment went awry. Being such a small company, they are not prepared or equipped to train inexperienced engineers. They were hoping to mentor me into the position but found it just wasn't working after my 19 months of employment.
3. The owner took full responsibility for the mistake, and stated that I had done my job as intended, but they planned to terminate me and hire an experienced engineer.

I was offered a Letter of Termination requesting that, to ensure a smooth transition, I would be available through the end of the month (appr. 3 more weeks) for any questions concerning my document setup or otherwise. By agreeing to this, they would pay my full salary through end of month. However, quoted from their letter, I would "agree to waive, release and forever discharge any and all claims" against the company and its officers "relating to [my] employment or the termination of [my] employment."

This was a very short letter and they asked that I sign the paper immediately, which I refused. I told them I would take the letter and contact them later regarding my acceptance.

I considered the offer and consulted several professional friends (but no lawyers) over the next several days. On day 4, I replied to the owner, stating the following circumstances, true to the extent of my knowledge:

• No reasonable warning was given prior to my termination at any time.
• No indication was given that my abilities, skills, or normal work habits were contradictory to those listed on my resume, or those required in the original job description.
• No discussion, evaluation, or formal review was conducted during my 19-month employment. Such review would have allowed proper correction of significant mistakes, if I had in fact made any such mistakes.
• No significant mistakes or errors due to my negligence were communicated to me at any time.
• No acts of insolence, disrespect of authority, misuse of company property, or disregard for company policy occurred due to my actions.
• Because I never made any false indication of my skill set or lack of boiler industry experience, you also stated that the onus of hiring an under-experienced engineer to fill this position fell largely on the company.

Furthermore, I stated:

The decision to seek, and subsequently hire, an engineer with my level of experience to fulfill a position requiring more knowledge in the industry was a risk taken by your company. I should not therefore be punished with immediate termination without compensation in lieu of warning. Had I known I made a mistake with my employment at risk, or if you had discussed options besides termination with me sooner, I would have had the chance to make different decisions or actions resulting in significantly different outcomes.​

Finally, I agreed to their Letter of Termination, provided they added the following stipulations:

• I will work with the company as necessary through March 31, 2012 to ensure a smooth transition of my duties. However, any work performed shall be on a Time & Material basis in addition to other compensation, and shall not interfere with obligations I may have while seeking employment.
• The company shall offer a severance package equal to no less than six months wages at the rate of salary I was receiving immediately prior to termination. This compensation is the amount I would require to pay living expenses and financial commitments during my career transition.
• The company shall continue to provide cost of coverage for my inclusion in the company health plan, with no change in service, for the next 6 months or until I find full-time employment with another company, whichever occurs sooner.

I stated that if they will not agree to these items, I would prefer to seek legal counsel for further discussion on the issue.

Now, I'm obviously no lawyer, just a lowly engineer, but I felt it was ethical and fair to ask for something more than what they offered. They can obviously deny my requests, and I am free to seek counsel... but should I?

I guess my primary questions would be:

1. If I were to pursue the issue, would it be fiscally and temporally worth my while? What would I consider my "break-even" point for escalating this?
2. Would a responsible employment lawyer consider my case viable?
3. What other questions/issues am I overlooking here that may work against me?

I appreciate any help. Thank you all.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

 

[Willlyjo]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas

To preface: I have been laid off in the past, in Texas, so I understand I am an at-will employee without any rights to severance or other compensation.

I was laid off 1 week ago without warning. Only my manager and the owner were present at the termination interview. During the interview, the manager gave the following reasons for my termination:

1. I was hired as an "experimental" employee. Generally the company hires engineers w/ 20+ years experience in this specific industry. In my case, I have 5 years general engineering experience, but had none specific to this industry.
2. The owner fully admitted the experiment went awry. Being such a small company, they are not prepared or equipped to train inexperienced engineers. They were hoping to mentor me into the position but found it just wasn't working after my 19 months of employment.
3. The owner took full responsibility for the mistake, and stated that I had done my job as intended, but they planned to terminate me and hire an experienced engineer.

I was offered a Letter of Termination requesting that, to ensure a smooth transition, I would be available through the end of the month (appr. 3 more weeks) for any questions concerning my document setup or otherwise. By agreeing to this, they would pay my full salary through end of month. However, quoted from their letter, I would "agree to waive, release and forever discharge any and all claims" against the company and its officers "relating to [my] employment or the termination of [my] employment."

This was a very short letter and they asked that I sign the paper immediately, which I refused. I told them I would take the letter and contact them later regarding my acceptance.

I considered the offer and consulted several professional friends (but no lawyers) over the next several days. On day 4, I replied to the owner, stating the following circumstances, true to the extent of my knowledge:

• No reasonable warning was given prior to my termination at any time.
• No indication was given that my abilities, skills, or normal work habits were contradictory to those listed on my resume, or those required in the original job description.
• No discussion, evaluation, or formal review was conducted during my 19-month employment. Such review would have allowed proper correction of significant mistakes, if I had in fact made any such mistakes.
• No significant mistakes or errors due to my negligence were communicated to me at any time.
• No acts of insolence, disrespect of authority, misuse of company property, or disregard for company policy occurred due to my actions.
• Because I never made any false indication of my skill set or lack of boiler industry experience, you also stated that the onus of hiring an under-experienced engineer to fill this position fell largely on the company.

Furthermore, I stated:

The decision to seek, and subsequently hire, an engineer with my level of experience to fulfill a position requiring more knowledge in the industry was a risk taken by your company. I should not therefore be punished with immediate termination without compensation in lieu of warning. Had I known I made a mistake with my employment at risk, or if you had discussed options besides termination with me sooner, I would have had the chance to make different decisions or actions resulting in significantly different outcomes.​

Finally, I agreed to their Letter of Termination, provided they added the following stipulations:

• I will work with the company as necessary through March 31, 2012 to ensure a smooth transition of my duties. However, any work performed shall be on a Time & Material basis in addition to other compensation, and shall not interfere with obligations I may have while seeking employment.
• The company shall offer a severance package equal to no less than six months wages at the rate of salary I was receiving immediately prior to termination. This compensation is the amount I would require to pay living expenses and financial commitments during my career transition.
• The company shall continue to provide cost of coverage for my inclusion in the company health plan, with no change in service, for the next 6 months or until I find full-time employment with another company, whichever occurs sooner.

I stated that if they will not agree to these items, I would prefer to seek legal counsel for further discussion on the issue.

Now, I'm obviously no lawyer, just a lowly engineer, but I felt it was ethical and fair to ask for something more than what they offered. They can obviously deny my requests, and I am free to seek counsel... but should I?

I guess my primary questions would be:

1. If I were to pursue the issue, would it be fiscally and temporally worth my while? What would I consider my "break-even" point for escalating this?
2. Would a responsible employment lawyer consider my case viable?
3. What other questions/issues am I overlooking here that may work against me?

I appreciate any help. Thank you all.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

Since Texas, like many other states is an "At Will" state in regard to employment, they can terminate you at any time even on a whim, for any reason they see fit. You absolutely have no claim and no attorney will see that you do. You were better off taking what they offered you. As it is, since you made a big deal of it, you probably will not get anything.

 

[commentator]

Bingo, Willyjo! What he says is right on. Your demands for severance and all your big mumbo jumbo about what you will do and won't do? Useless. They will know better. They will disregard all your verbage. You will get nothing. The "other conditions that I may be looking at that may work against me is that the company has absolutely no moral, legal or any kind of responsibility to do as you demand in your counter offer.

You have a no-fault termination. You can file for unemployment benefits. If you have monetary eligibility, you may qualify, since you were terminated for a non-misconduct reason.That is all you can do.

 

[cbg]

If I were to pursue the issue, would it be fiscally and temporally worth my while? What would I consider my "break-even" point for escalating this? No. It would be worth zero. If you got enough for a cup of coffee at Starbucks, consider it a win.

Would a responsible employment lawyer consider my case viable? Not only no, but hell no.

What other questions/issues am I overlooking here that may work against me? Other than the fact that you received what was actually a very generous offer under the circumstances and you pissed it away, giving the company a great big laugh at your expense while gaining absolutely nothing? I suppose when you put it that way, I can't think of any.

I understand I am an at-will employee without any rights to severance or other compensation.

What part of your own words do you not understand?

 

[Proserpina]

If I were to pursue the issue, would it be fiscally and temporally worth my while? What would I consider my "break-even" point for escalating this? No. It would be worth zero. If you got enough for a cup of coffee at Starbucks, consider it a win.

Would a responsible employment lawyer consider my case viable? Not only no, but hell no.

What other questions/issues am I overlooking here that may work against me? Other than the fact that you received what was actually a very generous offer under the circumstances and you pissed it away, giving the company a great big laugh at your expense while gaining absolutely nothing? I suppose when you put it that way, I can't think of any.

I understand I am an at-will employee without any rights to severance or other compensation.

What part of your own words do you not understand?

Co-sign, please.

I bet that letter has made the rounds a few times already....this part in particular was plain old silly:

I will work with the company as necessary through March 31, 2012 to ensure a smooth transition of my duties. However, any work performed shall be on a Time & Material basis in addition to other compensation, and shall not interfere with obligations I may have while seeking employment.
The company shall offer a severance package equal to no less than six months wages at the rate of salary I was receiving immediately prior to termination. This compensation is the amount I would require to pay living expenses and financial commitments during my career transition.
The company shall continue to provide cost of coverage for my inclusion in the company health plan, with no change in service, for the next 6 months or until I find full-time employment with another company, whichever occurs sooner.

 

[swalsh411]

You blew it. Should have just taken the offer.

 

[ecmst12]

You worked there for less than 2 years and you thought you had a chance on this earth that they would pay you 6 months severence? When severence is offered at all, the typical formula is one week per year of employment; you were offered more than that, you should have graciously accepted. Now you will likely receive bupkis.

 

[startedone]

I would have signed and then when they ask me to work in the next 3 weeks, ask for 3x pay rate. The contract says they are paying for 3 weeks of availability, not actual work.

 

[harshja]

Whew, tough crowd. I appreciate the advice, but man you guys were pretty rough on me to say the least.

Despite all of the facts presented in all the responses, I think everyone forgot one thing: the worst they could say was no.

To follow-up with all those interested:

The company agreed to pay me as an employee through end of month (3 weeks) which includes all benefits afforded the other employees. This was basically the original offer.

However, at the end of my employment (March 31), they agreed to pay 1 month severance beyond that.

In retrospect, I knew I had no legal grounds for my request and there was likely no way they would meet all my demands. The most I could have hoped for was that they negotiate at least a little, which is what happened.

Now I am covered financially through the end of April, and I will be able to claim unemployment beginning April 1. Pretty good turnout all in all.

Not that I'm trying to disprove all you internet nay-sayers... but I kind of just did. To all those in a similar situation, it's helpful to get advice from forums like this, but sometimes it's helpful just to ask.

Thanks for the input, guys. Now off to the library for some serious job-searching.

 

[tranquility]

I think everyone forgot one thing: the worst they could say was no.

Well, that and the fact your letter is a counteroffer and it would act as a rejection of their original offer.

 

[eerelations]

Not that I'm trying to disprove all you internet nay-sayers... but I kind of just did.

No, actually you didn't. This is a legal forum where the responders are required to provide posters with accurate legal information - and they all did exactly that.

 

[cbg]

The LEGAL responses were exactly what I told you they were. You had NO legal grounds to stand on and NO legal recourse if they threw you out and withdrew the offer they'd already made.

The fact that they were willing to work with you is generous on their part, and it's nice that they were willing to listen and meet you a part of the way. But the LEGAL responses you got were accurate. The company's willingness to provide you with more than the law requires does not make the legal responses you got incorrect.

 

[armstrong1988]

The LEGAL responses were exactly what I told you they were. You had NO legal grounds to stand on and NO legal recourse if they threw you out and withdrew the offer they'd already made.

The fact that they were willing to work with you is generous on their part, and it's nice that they were willing to listen and meet you a part of the way. But the LEGAL responses you got were accurate. The company's willingness to provide you with more than the law requires does not make the legal responses you got incorrect.

cbg is right you have no legal grounds to stand and your company is offering you more than enough but i am with you that it is really unfair that they terminate you without prior notice. You should take the company's offer and start looking for new job because if you just continue what you are planning you will just waste your time.

 

[CSO286]

cbg is right you have no legal grounds to stand and your company is offering you more than enough but i am with you that it is really unfair that they terminate you without prior notice. You should take the company's offer and start looking for new job because if you just continue what you are planning you will just waste your time.

I'm sure cbg appreciates that you created an account simply to validate her response......two weeks after the fact.