Employment Lawyers Can Answer Your Employment Law Questions
Thank you for your question today, I look forward to assisting you. I bring nearly 20 years of legal experience in various disciplines.
Well, no. That's not actually how the law works.
What is legally happening when you give two weeks notice is that you are immediately resigning your employment, but you are offering your employer the right to an additional two weeks of your services. They can accept those or not, and not accepting those two weeks does not legally convert the resignation to a termination.
I know that isn't what it seems like, but this is well-settled law and, unfortunately, not something that employees have ever been told in mass. Personally, I think that all employers should be required to disclose this fact at the time of hire, until all employees understand what giving notice actually means.
So, I would focus more on the reason that you gave your notice. If you can show that you gave your notice because you were leaving a situation that any reasonable person would leave (like discrimination), then the fact that you resigned doesn't legally matter.
No where did I say that an employer can do anything that they want. I also did not say that you shouldn't bother appealing to unemployment.
I answered the question that you asked though.
Your question concerned whether or not an employer has to pay out notice when you give it if they choose not to keep you during that period. The answer to that question is, no. As I previously stated, on this issue, the courts have repeatedly held that when a person gives notice of resignation, they are effectively quitting at that very moment and then offering the employer the right to an additional period of service that the employer doesn't have to accept. So, for the purposes here of you demanding that you either get two weeks of pay or this be converted to a termination. The law doesn't work that way. I wish I could tell you differently, but to do so would be to lie to you and I won't do that.
Now, I also told you how to focus your appeal. I didn't say to not appeal. Instead, I said to focus on your appeal on WHY you quit. There was a disagreement, you said, which could amount to discrimination. If you can show that any reasonable person would have quit that job, you can still get unemployment.
I can understand how you may be unhappy with how the law treats your situation, but my answer was not as bleak as suggesting that your employer can do anything that they won't or that you should not bother appealing.
Having an attorney frame your arguments never hurts. We have the ability to remain emotionally detached, and so more clear minded in delivering the arguments. We know what is legally relevant and not relevant.
I totally understand your being upset. It makes perfect sense, but you have to focus your arguments where they will have legal leverage.
An attorney can always help with that. The downside is the cost. If you can find at attorney willing to do a limited representation for this purpose, that may be worth your while financially.
On the issue of discrimination though, you need to address that both with unemployment and with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in your state if you want to preserve the right to actually sue over that issue.
Appeal your unemployment issue. See if you can find a local attorney to assist you, on a limited basis, in the hearing. If not, focus on arguing why you quit. Not that you have had problems with this person. Say how it is discrimination. State how you tried to deal with the situation, but the employer was unreasonable, etc. You have never really stated what happened, so I can't really express the facts of your argument here.
The point is that either you or your attorney have to focus on how reasonable it was for you to quit. You can't argue termination here. The law doesn't support that, so you have to show that you quit with "good cause."
Then, on an entirely separate occasion, contact the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. That is a separate agency that investigates discrimination in the work place and will preserve your right to sue for wrongful discrimination. This is an entirely different step than unemployment and starts you down a different path.
Ok. On what basis was it not offered to you, do you suppose?
Your race, religion, gender, age, disability or FMLA use?
Or did she simply not like you personally?
Ok. Your education status is not legally relevant. It may be a reason that she doesn't like you and wants to keep you down, but it's not legally helpful because it is not illegal to discriminate on that basis.
You would have to prove that the basis for her discrimination was your race. One way to do that would be to show that these other people that she was favoring were also Latina, or at least, not white.
If she was treating other whites well and just not you, that really harms any sort of suggestion that the basis for the treat was your race. Otherwise, she'd treat all white people like that.
These are the types of facts that the EEOC will have to investigate, to determine if there was true Title VII discrimination here that would justify a lawsuit in state or federal court, or rather, if this was just an office politics situation where she didn't like you personally, for whatever reason (which would not allow for a separate discrimination claim in state or federal court).
NOW, those same facts, which may or may not lead to an EEOC discrimination claim can still support an unemployment appeal here, based on your quitting for "good cause." You need to focus on the changing of the terms of your employment (changing the flexible hours under which you were hired) differing treatment, the greater scrutiny, the rudeness, etc.
I am leaving now for a meeting. I didn't realize we'd be talking for this long when I took the question. It's not a problem. Your questions are all very on point, I just couldn't predict that we'd run into this meeting period.
I will return. If I have not answered your questions fully, feel free to post another question with the understanding that I will not be able to address it until later this evening. If I have answered your questions, please rate my service.
I have returned from my meeting and can deal with any other questions that you have.
If you have no other question, I would ask that you rate my service, as that is the only way I receive any credit from JA for having worked with you.
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).