In the US, it's generally considered important to the economy that employees have good job mobility. There's plenty of stories of awful employers / managers; so job mobility is generally considered how workers protect themselves.
In general, because workers can pretty much leave whenever they want, employers need to make sure there's good financial incentives and good working conditions. Some employers will provide things like retention bonuses, stock plans tied to staying employed for a certain length, or other incentives that employees give up when they quit.
As far as a mandatory 3 month notice period: As an American, the few times I've been in a "bad" job, I've just wanted to leave. A 3 month period would just make me miserable. I'd rather have some kind of financial incentive to stay to a certain date.
If you get fired in Switzerland, your employer gives you a notice period of 3 months as well. Which is nice because it's plenty of time to find another job.
It really depends on the worker, in my experience, and their approach to the situation.
I had one person who gave a full year's notice, so that we could hire, train, and integrate the new worker before she left. It was glorious and resulted in zero down time.
I have had another who gave one month's notice, and spent the entire time being toxic. Digging out from under that took the better part of three years. The overlap for technical knowledge was just simply not worth the headaches in the team.
It's highly subjective, but it really does depend on the person, in absence of a clear "they're out immediately policy". But as a manager, my preference is to select a date roughly one week out from the notice and use that as the exit day. That way the worker can close any relationships they have, positively, but if they go sour there isn't really enough time to screw up the rest of the team.
In the context of your statement, we only hear one side of the argument. Remember that there is always a second perspective. I know that I have had folks who I have told to just go the same day they gave notice who tell their friends that I'm an uncaring asshat. The reality is that I fully expected them to be toxic in their remaining time.
I worked for a systems integrator that developed a turnkey software system for a client. It was a massive project (a systems migration) and ran for 3 years until handover. I was the lead on the project.
A couple of years later, I left my employer and joined a startup. 10-11 months later, the startup was looking to cut its burn rate and the CEO asked me to look for a job outside as revenues were not coming in as planned. He did promise me one thing. I could come back and join them after they became cash positive. He expected this to happen in 12-18 months. I trusted the CEO.
By pure coincidence, the client I worked several years ago was completely exiting operations from one of their operating locations (employees were offered to move to another city or leave with severance pay). The entire team that we had handed over the new turnkey system was being let go and none of the opted to move to a different city.
I applied for the job and got it. I told the management (they were from the other city) that I will de-risk the transition for them completely since I knew the system like the back of my hand and laid out one condition. I will stay for 2 years and will need a replacement to join in the 2nd year (there were some intricacies in the system that had daily, weekly, monthly and yearly processes) and I wanted my replacement to be trained on all steps. So, a year of overlap was justified. The hiring manager and the division VP, both interviewed me and agreed to this.
I did my job true to my conscience. As planned, I let them know at the end of the first year that a replacement needs to be brought in. A lateral hire came in as my replacement and I trained him and completed the knowledge transfer.
I quit after the second year as originally planned. My startup CEO rehired me back into their company which was now revenue-generating and cash positive. I joined in a senior leadership position.
That was one of the most intricate knowledge transfer of my career and I have been very happy. It wouldn't have been possible without the various parties trusting each other.
Someone on my team just gave a 1-year notice a couple months ago. She hasn't lined up the next gig, and won't start seriously looking until later this year. She has more than enough cushion to cover a gap, and she feels some loyalty to the team to make it a seamless transition (she's been here quite a long time).
I could see this happening in a project based environment or with someone who has a long term plan to pivot away from work(travel/family/having kids/etc). If you're working on something pretty big, you might be willing to see it through, and quit before moving on to the next thing.
I wouldn't assume they were planning on a new job immediately. Could be maternity/paternity leave, a plan to sail around the world, whatever.
Could also be an in demand skillset. If you get interest every week, you're probably not worried about being able to find work in 10 months or whatever.
>you're probably not worried about being able to find work in 10 months or whatever.
Which carries some risk. If you've had a dream to sail around the world, hike the Appalachian Trail, etc. and you have some decent money in the bank, it may be the right call. But you can also return to a more challenging employment environment.
This is sometimes done as a security concern to keep employees from swiping data or causing havoc. An employer may also assume that an employee with 2 weeks left will have tanking productivity, so why keep them around? The good employees will try to wrap things up and do knowledge transfer, but this certainly isn't going to be the majority of people.
The part where the employee has self-selected themselves as a risk. Lots of the major companies have capability to identify when an employee is downloading tons of data and files, but for the less sophisticated ones, you pretty much just have to look out for motive, and an employee giving notice is probably disgruntled...which is at least a little bit of motive.
> My god 2 weeks lol, someone quits and he is gone the next day. How is this legal?
You're not even required to give two weeks, though that's widely considered to be a courteous thing to do. If it's employment at will (as most jobs are in the United States), you can put down your tools and walk out the door with no notice of any kind. The other side of that coin is that the employer can fire you/lay you off, also with no notice.
> You can ALWAYS just put down your tools and walk out the door.
Not if you've signed a contract which says otherwise, which of course would make it not "at-will" employment.
"At-will" applies to both the employer and the employee. Either can terminate it without notice.
"At-will means that an employer can terminate an employee at any time for any reason, except an illegal one, or for no reason without incurring legal liability. Likewise, an employee is free to leave a job at any time for any or no reason with no adverse legal consequences."
I thought it was well known that employment law and customs differ greatly between US and Europe.
For example the difficulty in firing someone in France was a plot device in "Emily in Paris". In most states in the US you can be fired with immediate effect from a non-government job at any time, for any reason, or no reason at all.
It's only 3 months if you've worked for over 10 years at the same place (or you have a different contractual agreement of course). Otherwise it's a week during the probation period (usually 3 to 6 months), 1 month the first year and 2 months between 2 and 10 years.
Also it's symmetrical. Switzerland is "at will" (in the sense that they can lay you off at any time for any reason), but they have to follow the same notice period. In essence this is mandatory minimum severance.
Poland has 3 months for some cases. It is unusual in the rest of the world.
In Romania you give 2 weeks notice as an IC and 4 weeks as a manager. It can be shorter if the company agrees, but it cannot be longer by law: you can tell them in advance if you want, they cannot force you to stay if you don't.
> My god 2 weeks lol, someone quits and he is gone the next day. How is this legal?
How is it legal for this not to be the case? We have constitutional laws against enslavement or indentured servitude here. Nobody can force you to work if you don’t want to. You can quit right now if you want to.
What happens if you stop showing up to work in Switzerland? Do you go to prison?
What happens in Europe if you're supposed to work out 3 months notice and you stop showing up:
- you stop getting paid.
- you probably will have a hard time dealing with your former employers if you need something from them.
- they think you're a dick, and tell other people, if asked, what an asshole you are.
- potentially if they have nothing better to do, they get a lawyer to write you a threatening letter, then do nothing.
Nobody cares enough to go tell other people. Just try to picture the super awkward conversation between executives about and IC who resigned and then did noting during the notice period. In fact, they'd probably do the same.
I have never understood this "slavery" argument. It's not enslavement, it's fulfilling a contract. They won't put you in jail if you don't show up, you're simply in breach of contract.
It's like if you're a freelance and you accept a project. They can't force you to work on the project until completed, but they can certainly levy financial penalties against you if you don't.
> They can't force you to work on the project until completed, but they can certainly levy financial penalties against you if you don't.
There are very few circumstances in the US in which an employer can do that. It is considered wage theft, which in many states is a criminal offense that pierces the corporate veil. If you worked hours you get paid for those hours and the company can't avoid paying you (with fees or whatnot).
If you are forced to work because if you don't then you will be fined for breach of contract, then that is indentured servitude with extra steps. That is illegal everywhere in the US after the 13th amendment. That's why in the US employment contracts are generally enforced with rewards (aka golden handcuffs) rather than punishments.
Does that mean that any contracted work is indentured servitude? That sounds really broad. If I hire you to build a website, and you bail out halfway through and the liquidated damage clause kicks in, I don't think that makes you my indentured servant.
I was most likely confusing with "financial penalties", mostly it means not paying you after you stop working, and in some specific circumstances you can sue for damages. They can't fine you.
There generally aren’t financial penalties of any sort in those cases, except that you just don’t get paid the full potential value of the contract. You are generally paid hourly for the work that you do in a freelance gig (if it is an hourly contract) and paid a bonus on completion. If you fail to complete there is no bonus. Or in the case of a fixed price contract you are given a small amount upfront, and the full payment upon completion. You are never penalized for breaking contract—-you just don’t get paid the final amount.
If I sent you a link about a person's funeral to show a person had been born, would you not accept that either? The article is about the funeral of the order.
What do you think happens if you violate a court order? That's the threat behind violating the order of a judge. That it didn't happen doesn't mean my statement was incorrect. If they had actually left in contempt of the order, I would have said it did happen rather than it can happen.
In general, because workers can pretty much leave whenever they want, employers need to make sure there's good financial incentives and good working conditions. Some employers will provide things like retention bonuses, stock plans tied to staying employed for a certain length, or other incentives that employees give up when they quit.
As far as a mandatory 3 month notice period: As an American, the few times I've been in a "bad" job, I've just wanted to leave. A 3 month period would just make me miserable. I'd rather have some kind of financial incentive to stay to a certain date.