|
Six out of ten people hate going to their jobs every
day. In this article, wrongfullydismissed.com lawyer
Howard Markowitz advises miserable employees on:
Requesting your
exit package from work.
Jobs
are owned by the company, but you own your career. That’s
why miserable employees may consider pro-actively
approaching their employer for an exit package
incorporating fair termination pay, favourable reference
letter, and mutual release preventing future claims from
either side.
Employees seek predictable departure from work.
From
the employee’s perspective, you’ve secured (a)
short-term/financial bridge to your next job, (b)
favourable reference letter often unavailable through
formal litigation, (c) saved potential year-long
proceedings to trial, (d) favourable RRSP and other tax
allocation no trial judge would compel, (e) no
costly/public litigation proceedings with which to
contend, and (f) maximum control over timing, publication,
and characterization of your departure as one without
cause.
Companies save legal expense and collateral damage.
From
the company’s end, employers benefit from (a) significant
legal defence fees saved, (b) embarrassing/public
proceedings in court, (c) fixed/financial certainty, (d)
confidentiality clause preventing departing employee from
badmouthing the company, (e) departing employee less
disgruntled and therefore less likely to
badmouth/sabotage/disclose confidential company
operations, (f) heads-up/advance notice to arrange for
hire/training of replacement staff, (g) no adverse court
precedent encouraging and to be relied upon by future
departing employees, (h) no 11th-hour
progressive discipline/paper-trail fabrication to defend
termination in court, and (i) one less under-performing
employee to maintain on payroll for simple fear of
wrongful dismissal lawsuit if otherwise fired.
Employees fear retaliation.
Unfortunately, such win-win scenarios take place all too
infrequently on account of employees afraid their exit
package request will be refused or otherwise distorted
into some form of voluntary resignation in which case even
basic rights to minimal Employment Standards Act
pay and Employment Insurance benefits are off the table.
Companies fear constructive dismissal litigation.
Even
more afraid of discussing voluntary/exit package is your
employer in light of recent U.K. decisions like
Billington v. Michael Hunter & Sons Limited, [2003]
All E.R. (D) 83 [E.A.T.} where England’s Employment Appeal
Tribunal held that extending such voluntary exit package
can itself constitute veiled threat of termination
tantamount to constructive dismissal/harassment and
corresponding damages as a result. According to Pepper
v. Saskatoon Region Community College, [1982] S.J. No.
437 (Saskatchewan Queen’s Bench), “[a] demanded
resignation may be looked upon as a dismissal.”
Best way to predict the future is to create it.
And so
given natural reluctance of both parties broaching the
idea of voluntary/exit package, not to mention risk-averse
lawyers frankly/standing to profit from impending/all-out
formal litigation, pro-active employees will:
(1)
feel-out their employer by requesting “without
prejudice”/off-record discussion about their continued
employment;
(2) provide employee written note confirming
parties’ agreement to “without prejudice”/off-record
discussions to take place, thereby putting employer at
ease that frank comments won’t come back to haunt your
employer in any Statement of Claim, affidavit, or judgment
down the road;
(3) expand the negotiating pie through (a) focus on
parties’ win-win/mutual interests in amicable exit
package, (b) long-term goals like favourable reference
letter more important than grudge-match over less
life-changing/insignificant vacation pay arrears from
years past, (c) keeping your cool demonstrating how well
you’d handle yourself under pressure should matters not
resolve, and (d) know your legal/fall-back leverage to
any/all demands not reasonably met by your employer in
time respecting rare opportunity for frank/off-record
discussion – not to mention tens of thousands saved in
corporate legal expense, adverse court precedent,
under-productive work force, financial/litigation
uncertainty, and further devastated workplace morale had
you sued and won.
Every
exit is an entrance somewhere else.
And
so while the only people who like change are wet babies,
we hope this article will inspire the more miserable among
you into negotiating creative/win-win exit packages to the
mutual benefit of everyone but your litigation attorney.
About
Howard Markowitz
Wrongfully-dismissed at age-18 from one of Canada's
largest retail clothing chains, Toronto lawyer Howard
Markowitz vividly recalls his anger fuelled by employer's
unlawful attempt to withhold fair severance compensation.
And while time heals most wounds, Markowitz re-directs his
outrage for employment injustice into one of Toronto’s
most aggressive wrongful dismissal litigation practices –
wrongfullydismissed.com – Howard featured in
publications ranging from the Toronto Star to
Canadian Lawyer magazine, teaching the Law Society
of Upper Canada’s Bar Admissions course in negotiation
strategy, client list including agents of Human
Resources Development Canada, and attorneys logging
more than 250+ career appearances on Canadian radio
empowering the wrongfully-dismissed with streetwise
litigation strategy for maximum fair severance package
compensation.
|
