Tweet
Don't put yourself through the anticipation of whether the next job will turn into the same thing. That will inhibit you looking for the next job, and you don't want to count on riding the whole 6 months or whatever the period of benefits is. Documenting your job search is actually normal, that was my experience when I became unemployed.
If you're going to take action to dispute your termination, you're going to have to have a list of documented incidents, from your perspective of course, building the hostile work environment.
My experience was that the labor board judge went heavily on written documentation and wasn't much impressed by emoptional speechifying. The guy appealing his unemployment tried to get up and make a speech entailing everything from his military service in Vietnam right on down to that day in the year 2000. She told him to sit down and shut up.
Also, losing your cool in the hearing room is the worst possible thing you could do. The reality is that the judge can rule against you if he or she just doesn't like you.
We had a lot of documentation in our case, but the judge still scolded me simply because we tolerated the guy's excessive abscences as long as we did. If the guy hadn't actually pissed her off, she might've ruled against us because the labor board is usually for the worker, all else considered.
In California the labor board feels that if you hire someone and they do an incompetent job or miss too much work, that it's your fault as the employer for not sufficiently checking them out before you hired them. Just checking references isn't enough, as most companies will not actually say anything bad about an ex-employee for fear of lawsuit.
We had to let people go who we knew stole from the company, but all we could say is that they were let go and were not eligible for rehire. Anything else, if you couldn't prove it in court, you dared not say.
Unfortunately, because of fear of litlgation, both sides of the employer-employee relationship are subject to a shadow world of double talk. That makes it hard to know where you stand, and you can get blindsided in either role.
If you're going to take action to dispute your termination, you're going to have to have a list of documented incidents, from your perspective of course, building the hostile work environment.
My experience was that the labor board judge went heavily on written documentation and wasn't much impressed by emoptional speechifying. The guy appealing his unemployment tried to get up and make a speech entailing everything from his military service in Vietnam right on down to that day in the year 2000. She told him to sit down and shut up.
Also, losing your cool in the hearing room is the worst possible thing you could do. The reality is that the judge can rule against you if he or she just doesn't like you.
We had a lot of documentation in our case, but the judge still scolded me simply because we tolerated the guy's excessive abscences as long as we did. If the guy hadn't actually pissed her off, she might've ruled against us because the labor board is usually for the worker, all else considered.
In California the labor board feels that if you hire someone and they do an incompetent job or miss too much work, that it's your fault as the employer for not sufficiently checking them out before you hired them. Just checking references isn't enough, as most companies will not actually say anything bad about an ex-employee for fear of lawsuit.
We had to let people go who we knew stole from the company, but all we could say is that they were let go and were not eligible for rehire. Anything else, if you couldn't prove it in court, you dared not say.
Unfortunately, because of fear of litlgation, both sides of the employer-employee relationship are subject to a shadow world of double talk. That makes it hard to know where you stand, and you can get blindsided in either role.
Comment