Hacker News Reader

Comment by saulpw | Hacker News Reader

I've generally given a lot of notice as an IC, 2-3 months in some cases. and I have to say, I think it's not been appreciated, not even once. I've tried to spend the time wrapping things up, communicating my tacit knowledge to my coworkers, and writing documentation for things that I've done and created and am responsible for; I'm fairly certain that no one has given my opinions and thoughts any more than a cursory amount of attention.

Now, I absolutely loathe the modern corporate culture, which is happy to escort you out of the building the moment your employment is terminated, without giving you a chance to even say goodbye to your colleagues, who you might have been working with extensively for years. It's deeply traumatic and it contributes to an overall sense of fear and "screw teamwork, it's everyone for themselves".

But now when I "give notice" and they don't even let me try to work the next 2 weeks, I'm grateful. I don't want my coworkers to ignore or patronize me while I sit idle or do make-work. I don't want to have to put on a show about how wonderful the company and team are, and why I'm leaving anyways. Nor do I want to expose my true feelings to my co-workers and infect them with my bad attitude--even if the writing is on the wall for the entire enterprise. It's like a breakup: the best thing for everyone is to make it clean and crisp, say "it's not you, it's me", make a sincere statement to the effect of "let's be friends", and then see each other roughly never again.

View on HN

> But now when I "give notice" and they don't even let me try to work the next 2 weeks, I'm grateful.

Life hack: Put your resignation in writing with a date in the future. In many states, if the employer attempts to move the termination date (without compensation), they will award wages until your resignation date... I've used this twice, and in both cases, I was sent home, but HR told the manager that any severance would start after my resignation date which in one case led to a really awkward call when my manager tried to get me to come back for a month after having me pack up my desk and leave.

I don’t know they’d have to award you wages, but the only alternative to that would be firing you. Some might try to do that out of spite but it would be far worse for them than you.

They'd usually have to prove they fired you with cause not because you said you quit.

i.e. if you get caught stealing or are sexually harassing your co-workers, they can still fire you. They are not however required to let you work. They can revoke access and continue to pay, they can give you a package and terminate you employment. If you don't want to take the package, they can just walk you out of the building and terminate your employment two weeks later.

I’d guess most people, in the US at least, are employed at-will and could be fired right on the spot with no cause given. The problem with that though is you could turn around and file for unemployment which might end up increasing the associated taxes for them with increased headaches.

I’d agree that most reasonable HR departments wouldn’t let it go that far but some people like to play dirty irrespective of the costs.

If you put in 2 weeks notice and you get fired on the spot its a slam dunk un employment claim. (assuming you can show that yes you gave notice and you weren't fired first) Most places would rather just pay you the 2 weeks if they really dont want you around than deal with unemployment. Lots of corporate environments firing people takes more than 2 weeks anyways, and you would just be creating extra work for HR for what would seem like no reason.

Unemployment is like $350 - $550/week.

Unemployment in the US is set at the state level.

Many states pay significantly higher than $550. WA pays a max of $999 weekly.

Yeah. Last time I looked, MA was like $1k. Just across the border, NH was more like $400. Not a fortune and doesn’t start until vacation payout is done I believe but not nothing for most. You do need to at least go through some motions of job hunting.

Vacation payouts shouldn't be relevant. They are earned while working, so they are compensation from the period when you worked.

Unless, of course, you are trying to collect during a period that is scheduled as a vacation? That could create problems.

Can you explain what you mean by "slam dunk un employment claim"? Do you mean you'd be able to get unemployment benefits (which come from the state, not your company)? Or do you mean you'd have a claim against the company?

As a former lawyer (US-based), my sense is the first is true, and the second is not. As long as they're not canning you for being in a protected class, they can fire at-will employees whenever they want.

Yes, but you generally can't get unemployment for quitting. You have to get laid off or fired by the company to be eligible for unemployment benefits. It's especially easy to get benefits if you were fired without cause. There's no legal protection in cause/or no cause, but it will be the difference between an easy unemployment claim and a contested one.

Most employers get their unemployment insurance rate set by the number of people that require the service just like any other insurance. When an employee can prove they quit (probably before you started 'performance managing' for a with cause termination), then it makes it much simpler to just let them leave then to do the paperwork, eat the unemployment insurance adjustment, risk a possible 'wrongful termination' lawsuit (regardless of merit or ability to win).

Transferring their work and letting them dick around for a week is going to be considerably less work and risk then terminating them before the date. So as a general rule, when you give advance notice, in writing, there is a very good chance that they'll just let you leave on the day.

Additionally, if you fire everyone immediately when they give notice, then people stop giving notice all together, so you just come in some days and are a person short.

How can it increase taxes? Unemployment is funded by payroll taxes that are fixed and non-negotiable.

The short answer is that unemployment claims increase the amount a company has to pay in during future years. https://unemployment-services.com/unemployment-claim-cost-em...

This is partially correct. FUTA is a federal payroll tax that in part funds unemployment insurance and is fixed and a pretty small amount. The other part, SUTA (State Unemployment TAx) is usually only fixed in the first few years of a business' existance, and then is annually adjusted by a bunch of factors including industry, unemployment claims, completeness of employer reporting and penalties for outstanding assessments. In practice, too many claims can land an employer in a situation where SUTA can go up substantially. In my state, SUTA ranges between .2% and 5.4% (of pay), so unemployment claims can be quite expensive if they result in an increase in SUTA.

Dumb question: why would you get severance if you resigned?

Because of resigned effective of a future date. Any termination of employment before then is either a with-cause firing or a layoff where severance is required.

Seems like an interesting idea. Give as much notice as possible and then see if they bench you until then.

> Any termination of employment before then is either a with-cause firing or a layoff where severance is required.

If they're paying you until that future resignation date, it's not a firing or a layoff, is it? The part that your employer is responsible for is your salary, not providing you with things to do.

I people usually don't keep getting paid after a "termination of employment"

I would definitely want to talk to an employment lawyer familiar with the laws of the local jurisdiction before making any assumptions.

Severance is often paid (in at-will employment jurisdictions) just as a way to get the departing employee to sign a document agreeing not to sue, and possibly agreeing not to disparage.

I'm not an employment lawyer (but am a former lawyer), and I would think that if someone said they were going to quit way in the future, and was then fired, they would have a pretty poor case if they tried to sue. The company would credibly claim that it was not based on impermissible discrimination or retaliation, but was just because they assumed the employee would massively slack off.

There's also the question of damages — if you were about to quit anyway, then your damages would be relatively small because it would only be the salary that would have been paid between the time you were escorted out and the time you planned to leave. It could be $100k if you're very well-paid, but that pales in comparison to what you would get in a discrimination lawsuit (which is what severance agreements are seeking to avoid).

It would also be relatively difficult to find a lawyer who would take a case with a relatively small amount on the table, and an uphill battle in terms of proof.

For the right to call me about past business, and a guarantee I will help.

> Life hack: Put your resignation in writing with a date in the future.

This sounds like such a neat way to deal with it. I wonder if it's legally valid in my jurisdiction (in Sweden.) I have never heard of it but yet again, why not?

I always do that, draft the email to my boss and hr, walk into my bosses office, send the email saying:

"I will be ending my employment with ${company} effective ${two_weeks_from_now}. I'm giving ${X} weeks notice to afford ${company} the opportunity to transition my work and knowledge to other employees as they see fit. I appreciate the opportunity ${company} has given me and wish you all the best as you continue to advance ${company mission}"

Then I say, "I'm quitting, my last day will be in ${two_weeks_from_now}" and there's already a record of how that conversation came about. No one's going to walk out and say they fired you and you're pretending to quit or strange shit like that.

Termination dates are in the employment contract 99.9% in Sweden. At most you’ll get a “lmao, no”.

Notice periods are, as far as I know and in my experience, the _minimum_ number of weeks or months to give notice. Nothing is stopping you from giving notice earlier.

The question is can an employer truncate it?

It seems like you could really harm a company by forcing them to pay you to nothing if because they don't want to start someone on a project they will definitely leave half way through.

If you continue fulfilling your responsibilities as an employee, I don't see why. If a longer planning horizon is needed, a longer notice period is the answer.

No it’s not valid in Sweden (or anywhere else). The date at which your resignation starts to count is the date that your employer learns of your intent to leave. You are however free to agree on an arbitrary date with them as your last day.

It’s not the date you put in the letterhead. That would be insane.

I think that's not what was meant. You _can_ hand in your notice earlier than contractually necessary. If your notice period was 2 months, and you let your employer know, that you are quitting in 3 months, that's perfectly legal. Its not changing the date of the document, it's about the date of your intended departure you mention within it.

> It’s not the date you put in the letterhead. That would be insane.

Clarification: I put in the body of the letter the effective date I will be leaving. Something like:

"My final day will be December 12, 2018."

The date in the letterhead has nothing to do with it.

If you're really mistrusting of your employer, you may not want to give them proof you notified them earlier.

If that was the motivation, you would need to not notify them earlier. Simple as that.

> No it’s not valid in Sweden (or anywhere else). The date at which your resignation starts to count is the date that your employer learns of your intent to leave.

"or anywhere else" is an exceedingly broad assertion. For Canada:

> Yes, you do have to give notice of your resignation in Canada. The common law imposes a duty to provide notice of resignation on all employees.

> However, you don’t have to give two weeks’ notice of your resignation in Canada per se. Rather, you have to give a “reasonable” amount of notice of your resignation, which may be more or less than two weeks’ notice. The amount of reasonable notice an employee has to give will depend on their specific circumstances, as discussed below.

> The obligation to give reasonable notice is a general common law obligation of all employees. In Sure-Grip Fasteners Ltd. v. Allgrade Bolt & Chain Inc., [1993] 45 C.C.E.L. 276 (Ont. Gen. Div.) at pages 281-282, Justice Chapnik found: […]

* https://duttonlaw.ca/do-you-have-to-give-two-weeks-notice-in...

During the 'notice period' you still have a job, though the employer may tell you to simply stay at home (and rescind access, etc).

Can you give 10 years notice and if you get fired within 10 years they would be forced to pay out 10 years?

“Reasonable”

The context of the grandparent comment implies that they date their letter of resignation as being submitted in the future.

This isn’t accurate, might have worked in one-off situations but, given at-will employment, this was at best a confused HR employee trying to help, not a legal conclusion. Note the obvious edge cases

> given at-will employment, this was at best a confused HR employee trying to help

US centric advice: Most states will automatically award unemployment to the employee if they are termed before the resignation date. In some cases, a dated resignation when combined with an email chain about "how to get rid of them" it will turn into a genuine legal risk. Most US HR people will advise to just respect a reasonable resign date or offer a severance agreement to avoid risk. Source: aside doing it myself with a couple of employers, since then I've owned four companies and dealt with the aftermath from managers who think they are smarter than HR.

If it works, you win $$: why be so negative? Maybe some downsides if they make you work longer, but that is a judgement call to make depending on context.

Factually it worked twice for them, versus your theories that it shouldn’t work.

Comments are packed full of 'em, downside of preannouncing you're quitting months from now is you get 0

In the U.S., an employee that resigns is not entitled to severance. In this case, you would only have received severance if you had been terminated before your resignation date. If they sent you home but continued to pay you for that month, you would not have been entitled to severance.

This is correct, unless there's a reason why they should... and if they are smart, the severance will include setting the term date to the severance date.

I don't understand your comment. The only circumstances in which a resigning employee is entitled to severance is if they have an employment contract entitling then to severance in the event of a voluntary departure.

Even executives don't get that. A run of the mill employee definitely won't.

What state is this? This would only apply here if you already had a contract for a fixed term. Most employment here is at will and so this won't work.

Everyone else: please talk to a lawyer in your state familiar with employment law before banking on this.

Isn't that just normal? How do people normally resign? I've always written up a letter saying my last day will be x

Probably not as you will just make it worse by letting them fire you. Which makes for an awkward reference call later.

Like most things, it depends. I've given employers no time up to 4 weeks. Smaller ones will definitely receive more grace if they have been good to me. And, when I was an employer I tried to do the same for others.

Another note is that I'm always succession planning. Document, share what I'm doing, etc... I learned early on that if I couldn't be replaced, I also couldn't be promoted.

not a lot of companies seem to recognize this pattern and encourage it.

benefit from it, sure.

> I learned early on that if I couldn't be replaced, I also couldn't be promoted.

Nailed this on the head.

At the same time, the extra work this requires is often not appreciated by management either - I've seen some (admittedly poor) managers comment on lower productivity due to the documentation efforts.

It may not be appreciated by management in terms of someone saying “wow, your documentation was incredible, here’s that raise/promotion.” But the people who interact with your documentation will appreciate it, which raises your stature in the organization long term.

And management priorities change over time, it’s not uncommon for companies to emphasize documentation more as they mature.

> I learned early on that if I couldn't be replaced, I also couldn't be promoted.

Even as someone who has zero interest in being promoted, I think this is good practice. It's part of helping to maintain a healthy organization. If anyone is actually indispensable, that's a very dangerous situation for the team and the company.

Something I realized. After you give notice, at most, the business needs about a week to decide what to do with the work you were handling. In tech, most projects can be deferred, and most services can go into KTLO.

After the week is done to figure that stuff out - no one really cares about you anymore. There is likewise a tacit assumption that you won’t deliver anything again (why would you?). As such it’s usually best to let someone out the door after a week.

Typically when I give notice, I simply state that the employer can do whatever over the next 2 weeks. 70% of the time, when given the choice, they will decide on a fast transition of 1 week. There hardly is anything to do the second week.

On the day I give notice, there is a bit if a shock and a "what are we gonna do now?" attitude. On the second day, word has got around and everyone wants to know where you're going, etc. On the third day, i brief whoever will take over my job. On the fourth day I am no longer invited to meetings or really have anything to do for the next several days until I leave.

In practice, even two weeks is more than enough for your role to be taken over by someone. I really see little value in giving more notice that that for either the employer or employee.

After you give notice, at most, the business needs about a week to decide what to do with the work you were handling. In tech, most projects can be deferred, and most services can go into KTLO.

Ideally, sure. In real life the employee needs to do a brain dump of handover documents because no one writes anything down.

does anyone ever read those braindumps?

Not top to bottom like a doc, but having it means you can include it in a search when you don't know something. That often proves useful.

I completely agree. I've been asked to stay on an extra week or two and I think it was a terrible decision. Nobody really cared or paid attention in hand off meetings (I'd like to think careful documentation was later appreciated when someone had to take those things on later) and I was interested in moving on.

I've never given less than a month's notice, and the notice has always been tied to the end date of whatever project or current workload I happen to have. My direct bosses have always expressed appreciation for this, but then again, I've only ever left a company once because I was dissatisfied working there.

Culture and relationships are a two way street, and you are always responsible for your own part in building it. You might have a shit boss or work for a shit company and it's not going to end well, and if that's the case and there's nothing you can do, then all that's left is to look out for yourself. I wouldn't ever advocate for that to be the default position, though.

Question: Are you in Europe? I get the feeling this sort of thing is much more common there (or at least "not the US")

Maybe not. I'm in the US and this is generally my practice as well. Unless I'm dying to get out or have other circumstances encouraging a quick exit, I offer a month at least. Sometimes more.

Nope, midwest US. Two weeks notice is social etiquette as a minimum to avoid burning a bridge, so to speak. There's nothing against giving further notice.

Thinking back on it, though, I would absolutely not give further notice if I was only doing "busy" work (as someone suggested elsewhere). I try to maintain a good relationship with my employers as a professional courtesy. Putting out notice beyond what active work I have would, I think, send a signal that I'm looking to collect an easy pay check and disconnect. Lining up my resignation with my active work sends a message that I am still invested in contributing to my team's success, and that's a good way to have people be more than happy to give you referrals or networking opportunities in the future.

That's interesting. In my experience, I've somehow managed to score referrals despite daring to give less than 2 weeks notice and my previous bosses still recognize my investment in the company's success. It's rather amusing that the midwest isn't more forgiving when it comes to shorter notices, or that an employee is instantly branded as a "bridge-burner".

> midwest isn't more forgiving

As with all social etiquette, it's a guideline, not a law. The outcome depends entirely on your relationship with your boss and what kind of position the team is left in when you leave.

Don't you have it defined in your contract typically? It is in the UK. Two weeks is about the minimum it'd be for a professional job, often more with seniority or time at a company (i.e. contact will say +1 week for every two years or whatever).

Most employment positions in the US are at-will, meaning either party is legally allowed to terminate at any point for no reason given, barring legal protections against discussion and retaliation.

It's different if you're a contractor (i.e. not an employee but hired for a specific contractor term) or in a union (not an issue for most software engineers). My experience with both is indirect.

Not the parent, but I have always given long notice periods in the US. Typically 3-4 weeks.

In all cases, they have been appreciated, and it gave me the opportunity to wrap up projects.

In several cases(the previous three jobs), I have been retained in a 1099 capacity at rates that far exceed my salary(3-5x) for consulting on projects and ongoing expertise of archaic systems. Typically that arrangement winds down to very little work after the first year.

In all of these scenarios, my manager was aware I was looking for months before I put in my notice. My reason for moving is a combination of environment(outgrown the scale of the company, or looking to relocate) and pay.

Totally agree. Two weeks for knowledge transfer should be it. Remember that most leadership view all engineers as replaceable cogs. Just wrap up what you can and loop others into the things that can't and move on with life. Big companies probably don't want you around from a liability. Small companies want the knowledge transfer because you have "blind-sided" them. (Despite asking for a raise for the last two years and told no chance.)

My experience is that two weeks is probably about right most of the time--especially for ICs. The company expects it as the norm. And it's either enough time to do a reasonable handoff or no sensible length of time is going to be enough. (And I'll always answer the odd "help!" question for the coming month or two.) Go much beyond that and you're in this odd extended winding down situation where you can't really take anything new on and you're increasingly checked out. And, in a physical office environment, you're probably also increasingly just a distraction.

I gave 6 weeks on my last one to a fanng, Never again. That was when the project I was working on was slated to finish, and I continued working on it until then. I but it was a bit unexpected for me and I had a 4 day weekend scheduled to take my kids on a school trip.

Came back on Monday, incompetent fuckers had locked me out and terminated me as a no call no show. lol, uh, it's in the fucking time off tool you fucks. The thing that really sucked was that I was a high preforming employee, I canceled a promotion review to give notice. 7 years in and some jerkoff needs your seat and 6 weeks isn't appreciated. The got me reconnected after a couple days and then my manager never talked to me again. that was a long three weeks there at the end.

Yep this is more like the real word experience. Never be "nice" to companies, they don't give a shit about you. I'm not even bitter or anything like that is just the reality. Your coworkers will forget about you in a week. Work is transitional, don't make it your life.

I completely agree. The part about infecting people with my attitude is especially relevant. It's normal that we talk. And when they ask "why?", it feels awkward. If I tell them all the reasons, it will influence their perception of their situation (which might be quite positive) and I prefer not to do that. But if I avoid answering, I will be perceived as dishonest or hiding something. So usually I invent some excuse so that nobody feels bad.

> But if I avoid answering, I will be perceived as dishonest or hiding something. So usually I invent some excuse so that nobody feels bad.

So you avoid the perception of being dishonest and hiding something by actually being dishonest and hiding something?

You don't need to lie. There are plenty of generic reasons you can give why you're leaving that probably even have the virtue of having some truth to them. (Was time to make a change.) No reason to get into a blow-by-blow of why now and what all the things that made the situation less and less tolerable were.

It's not lying. It just not telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

ADDED: Companies can also obviously be in a place where at least some of your reasons are so blindingly obvious they don't need to be stated.

This is the way. You can be honest, and authentic, without running down the company or your coworkers.

“Love it here, just looking for a new challenge” or “Love it here, but I couldn’t pass this opportunity up” have gotten me far. You can always be more honest behind closed doors if you want.

I'm impressed (and a bit envious) you were able to say that first part. I wish I'd worked at place where I could honestly say the same.

Every place I've left, the best I could muster with a straight face was a bland tautological platitude — something like, "Oh, you know, just going to do something different."

I don't exactly have tons of experience quitting jobs or ending relationships, but I've never understood the relentless navel-gazing of "why" that seems to come along with most people quitting their jobs. And, besides, what's the point of expounding on how things could be better (in an "exit interview" or otherwise), when everyone knows all that feedback will have no impact?

It seems to me the practical part of the conversation is simply, "I'm ending our relationship." And then — everyone moves forward from there.

It's mostly just a ritual. After you've gotten past whatever pressures and inducements your management offers (or not) for you to stay, the exit interview is you pretending to seriously answer the "why" and HR pretending to care.

> And, besides, what's the point of expounding on how things could be better (in an "exit interview" or otherwise), when everyone knows all that feedback will have no impact?

Many employers do listen to exit interview feedback, and if themes are consistent, changes do get made. Have seen it happen more than once, although it usually takes multiple departures or the loss of a key person.

Of course not all employers are like this, but if you‘re willing to give yours the benefit of the doubt, it can be worth paying it forward to your colleagues by giving your feedback in a professional way.

> Many employers do listen to exit interview feedback, and if themes are consistent, changes do get made. Have seen it happen more than once, although it usually takes multiple departures or the loss of a key person.

My anecdata seems to confirm this. I told my employer I love my job but I'm leaving solely because of their RTO policies. They changed them after I left.

It is still not the truth. I am not saying you are obliged to say the truth if the is unsafe or if no one will listen. But lets not pretend this is actually honest communication. It is not.

I once shared an office with someone in order to take on their work because they were retiring early. I got/had to hear about all of their gripes with our employer and within six months I was in complete agreement with them :)

> And when they ask "why?", it feels awkward. If I tell them all the reasons, it will influence their perception of their situation (which might be quite positive)

I find this on itself to be a dysfunction. In well functioning team, they would be able to guess, because they would know your general opinions. And their positive opinions would be known too.

As in, this happens only because the communication within the team or within the corporation is dysfunctional and people dont talk in the first place.

Just lie, but you don't normally have to really lie. Is there ever one single reason for leaving? You don't have to tell them the worst version of your decision.

One time I gave 4 week notice and my lead HR person (~2000 person company) who I have never spoke to before called me very upset and yelled at me for several minutes about how rude I was being by doing 4 weeks instead of 2.

> and I have to say, I think it's not been appreciated, not even once.

This mirrors my experience, but for one time where my manager had been a friend for some years prior to me reporting to him.

I’m doing wrap up now, and I’ve only just started job hunting. You don’t have to tell them that’s what you’re doing.

Yeah exactly. The experiences around me agree with you: once someone is "out" most managers will look to "eliminate" that person from the group ASAP. I've even seen someone being asked not to come in from tomorrow, which shocked everyone since that person was well liked, a good performer - even had multiple patents associated with him. It was just a power trip from that manager.

> I've generally given a lot of notice as an IC, 2-3 months in some cases. and I have to say, I think it's not been appreciated, not even once.

I personally think it's the right thing to do, not for the company, but for your colleagues. If staying longer can help your colleagues to take over your stuff, some will be grateful and will remember it if your paths cross again.

IDK. All my colleagues leave after 2-3 weeks, sometimes less. It's just how things are done. My last employer moved my end date so the could claw back several hundred to a thousand off my last pay check, after I stayed a bit longer.

I know now I might have been able to fight this, and may have done that knowing what I know now. On the other hand it might not be worth the effort.

If you're wondering how, I think I didn't "earn" vacation until the end of the month, and was technically using "borrowed vacation". I stayed with that company for 7 years... I can't think of any other reason for them to end my employment two days early, right before the end of the month.

> I absolutely loathe the modern corporate culture[...]

If you've been on the other side of that - having employees sabotage or steal in the process of leaving - you'd at least understand it. Not many people do that, but it's always the bad apples who ruin it for everybody.

I gave several months notice one time. They didn't use any of the time to onboard someone else, and afterwards talked about how I left them high and dry.

From now on I'm giving 2 weeks and getting the fuck out of there.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com