[bluefirebrand]

If you're in a country with any kind of decent labour rights, getting let go is 100% better than quitting.

If you quit you don't get EI, you don't get any kind of payoff from the company, and it looks worse than "I was let go due to company downsizing" when interviewing.

[wXD29445tmDjTPC]

I'm in France which is quite decent for labor rights, but the only time I have been let go, I had to wait 6 months before getting any money because a bunch of judges and lawyers had to fight to decide who would get money and how much.

It's good in theory, but in practice you can't count on that money, and you must find another job ASAP to feed your family.

I found a better job and I will quit because it's way faster for me to get out of my current company's mess.

[almost_usual]

So get fired for not commuting to work then.

[hiyer]

Getting fired is not the same as being laid off. If they fire you for insubordination (which is what not reporting for mandatory office attendance would be) or bad performance, they don't have to pay you anything. If you're laid off, most companies would give you at least a few months of pay in compensation.

[smugma]

Not showing up to the office when required could be a fireable offense (not quite insubordination but along the same lines).

I knew a guy at Apple that was given 60 days to find a new job or move to LA or be terminated. He found a job in another team just as his 60 days was running out.

[Jtsummers]

If you want to qualify for unemployment (in the US), don't get fired. Losing your job through your own fault usually disqualifies you from collecting.

[cratermoon]

Smaller companies will let you go and say you shouldn't get unemployment insurance, but if you appeal they won't bother to contest, so you can collect anyway. This works especially well if the company's HQ are in a different state than were you work, but it also depends which state you reside. It's not solely about so-called "at will", though.