Cathie's Corner Blog

(Published October 26, 2009)

The economy must be getting better, in my opinion.  The number of questions I'm hearing from people who have successfully found new jobs is increasing.  But the question that comes up most often is one that disturbs me somewhat.

I don't know if it's paranoia or if the questioners have reason to ask, but I'm getting numerous questions along this line: "If I give my notice and I'm immediately walked out the door, does my employer have to pay me for my notice period?"

The answer, of course, is no; there is no such requirement outside of a legally binding contract or collective bargaining agreement.  But it worries me that the question arises so often.  I have never worked for a company that would not pay a resigning employee if it indeed found it necessary to release the employee early.

It's not that I don't understand why an employer might not allow an employee to work out their notice.  I completely understand that in some cases, it's necessary.  When your top salesperson gives notice, you don't want to wonder whether they're promoting your product or that of their new employer.  Or if it's a problem employee, you just want them out as quickly as possible before they can cause any more trouble than they already have.  I've accepted notice early when it was warranted, but I've always paid the employee for the time.

There are several reasons for that.  One, it's just plain good manners.  If they had the courtesy to offer you notice, and you're unable or unwilling to allow them to work out the time, it's rude not to provide them with the pay they would have gotten if they did.  Then there's the question of unemployment.  In many states, if you do not accept notice that is offered and do not pay it out, part or all of the time can qualify the employee to receive unemployment benefits.  Is it really worth a potential increase in your rates to save a few days' pay?  Even in these tight times?

Hopefully, cases where an employee gives notice but is released immediately and without pay are the exception rather than the rule.  You don't really want to get a reputation for early, unpaid releases when an employee gives notice; otherwise, you'll soon find that none of your employees give notice at all.  It's all very well for you to decide that you don't need the employee in question to hand off his work to someone else and that he can leave immediately, but it's another thing to have all your employees quitting without notice, leaving you with no idea what their passwords are or the status of the Johnson account.  You want to be the one to make the decision; you don't want it taken out of your hands.

So consider the long term when your employees give notice — there's more to think about than just the immediate pay period!

Catherine Bannon is an HR consultant in Marshfield, MA (catherine.bannon@gmail.com). Bannon worked for 10 years in HR management before starting her consulting practice.

(Published October 12, 2009)

One of the things I find myself repeating endlessly is, "Check your state laws." We all know that state law can vary from federal law, but every once in a while I run into a state law that is somewhat unique even from other states. It was suggested to me recently that I make a list of a few of these laws. Hopefully if you are in the state in question, I'm not telling you anything you don't already know, but who knows? It might be useful if you open up a branch, or hire a salesperson, or have a new client who needs on-site work, in a state other than your own.

I came across this one only recently. We all know, or should know, that federal law gives employers the right to dock exempt employees' salaries only in very limited circumstances. One of those circumstances is when they have used all their available sick time (yes, I'm simplifying). But in New Hampshire, an employer cannot dock an exempt employee for illness at all, unless the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) applies. The state law covers most of the other situations that federal law covers, except for illness. (NH 275:43-b)

One of the most unusual laws I've ever run across is a law in South Dakota that allows employers to hold an employee's final paycheck until the employee has returned all of the employer's property. This is not to say that the employer can take their time about it; if the property is not returned until after the pay would normally be due, it must be paid as quickly as possible after the property comes in. But for the state to give an employer permission to hold the check? That's rare. (SD 60-11-10)

There are quite a few states that require an employer to allow their employees time off to vote. In most of those states, it's a standard block of time for all employees; between two and three hours in most cases. However, in Nevada, the amount of time the employee is allowed to take depends on how far they live from the polling place. I don't know how many employers will actually want to take the time to double check the distance between each employee's home and the location of the nearest polling place, but they might want to at least keep an eye on how much time people are taking! (NV Rev. Stat. Ann. 293.463)

States also vary in terms of categories protected under their anti-discrimination laws. The following is only a sampling; do not take this list as complete:

Political affiliation — CA, DC, NY

Personal appearance — DC

Height and weight — MI

Use of a service animal — NV, NJ, NY, PA, VA, WA

Observance of Sabbath — NY

Familial status — PA

There are others, and other states, but these were the ones that stood out for me.

State laws are changing rapidly, and it's our responsibility to know what they are!

Catherine Bannon is an HR consultant in Marshfield, MA (catherine.bannon@gmail.com). Bannon worked for 10 years in HR management before starting her consulting practice.