[giantg2]

"they'd be willing to take anything."

That would apply to me too. I have 10 years in the industry but have been underpaid and have a family. My current plan if I get fired is to work at Walmart or Lowes until I can find another job.

[nazgulsenpai]

The company I worked for the last 7 years closed year end, and I'm a single dad with a weird schedule and self-taught (no college). I thought my prospects were bad but I got a better job for better pay at a better company, and I was totally honest with them about my skills, experience, etc during the hiring process so there were no surprises.

If you feel like you could lose your current, underpaid job I encourage you to start looking around. I wish I would have before waiting til the bitter end.

[mordechai9000]

This is very similar to where I'm at. I feel like I do have skills that could be used somewhere, but i don't look great on paper, and I'm not very good at selling myself.

[sumeno]

If you're underpaid and employed the now is the time to look for that new job, not after you're fired and working at Walmart

[giantg2]

I was underpaid. Now my skills have atrophied to match my low pay. Only about 17 years until I can "retire". I'll probably end up working at Walmart in retirement anyways.

[chaoticmass]

Hate to say it, but this fits me a lot right now (sans the family part). I really need to skill-up and start looking for a new gig.

[sharemywin]

pretty sure unemployment pays better than walmart.

[bluGill]

Hard to say. Unemployment has some weird rules which vary from state to state. I got laid off a few months after starting a new job, and since I hadn't been working there long my total pay wasn't very high, WalMart would have been as good. Fortunately I got a new job quick that time, but when you are out of work and don't have a lot of savings compared to your bills... Even if you have 6 months savings, seeing savings fall month by month while you just pay bills is demoralizing.

[sharemywin]

I wasn't trying to be cheeky with this. I was saying sometimes the ~40% that unemployment pays would be much better than walmart. and working there could stop your benefits.

Also, you can focus on a finding a job in your field. If for some reason you didn't want to get unemployment while you look for a job I would try to find any type of contracting job even upwork or fiverr so you can at least put Self-Employed Consulting on resume.

[giantg2]

If you're fired, unemployment doesn't pay you anything. My company generally won't layoff and instead finds reasons to fire people.

[thetopher]

This isn’t true in California, and I don’t think it’s generally true in other states either.

A fired employee is still eligible for unemployment as long as they were not fired because of specific misconduct. Poor performance does not constitute misconduct. Misconduct must be “willful and wanton.” (Regularly missing work or being late, stealing, fighting with coworkers, etc.)

The CA guidelines are long, but contain some useful examples and guiding principles: https://edd.ca.gov/en/uibdg/Misconduct_MC_5/

[giantg2]

Good point. My company generally finds "misconduct" reasons to let someone go, like long lunch breaks, being late, computer use like logging into personal accounts etc. They are very lenient about a lot of stuff in practice, but the official policies are much stricter. They basically have enough policies that they can get almost anyone for violations. It's all about having many rules and unequal enforcemnt - it's much like the regular legal system that way.

[1123581321]

You can still fight misconduct claims to UI by asserting problems with the work environment. Specific advice would vary by state. There is no reason an employee shouldn’t try.

[bluGill]

If how the company acts in practice is different from their written rules, then anyone fired can sue the company for wrongful dismissal. Check with a lawyer.

[giantg2]

The tough part is solid evidence supporting it.

[bluGill]

A fired employee can sue for wrongful dismissal. If this happened to your check with a lawyer, if you can show that the company had a pattern of overlooking such things, then you can get big bucks in court.

I know of people who should have been fired who were talked into quitting instead just because quitting means they can't sue. In turn the company gives the official answer "X worked here between these dates and left in good standing". Since the company always said the same thing when asked if someone worked there it wasn't a negative to the next employer, while if they fired they would have to say left in bad standing.

Of course since getting fired is a sensitive issue I won't say who. Reading between the lines in conversations and how the company acted though I'm sure that is how it worked.

[greedo]

Any company that states that an employee left "in bad standing" either has an idiot for counsel, or poor HR practices. Providing any information other than employment dates opens you up for lawsuits.

[bluGill]

Which is why the company works hard to convince someone who should be fired to quit. If they fire someone and don't mention that fact they can be sued for withholding information, but if the person quit on their own terms.

Note that there is a difference between being sued and losing in court. Even if you win you still need to pay your lawyers. I've had one lawyer tell me about spending nearly a million dollars in court for a case that was about $100,000 in asked damages that the lawyer knew based on facts they would lose - but [I can't talk about this part] made it impossible to figure out how to settle out of court.