Fired for not making increased sales quotas. Why do employers always fight this.
(Los Angeles, California)
very long story, involving verbal abuse, lack of support, the list goes on. The good news is I have a substantial amount of documentation in the form of e-mails, sales reports, and a great rebuttal to a hatchet job of a performance review.
Bottom line, it's the recession dummy! and the publishing company is in serious financial trouble. No mystery there, I have no idea how or why they are even bothering to dispute my claim.
I can only give you my thoughts from whence I came.
First, as long as an appeal is timely .. you'll get a hearing. It doesn't require much skill to file an appeal...I'm talking about lower level appeal hearings.
An unemployment appeal to a board of review is another story all together and does require knowledge of the states rules and procedures for administrative hearings. You'd need to be specific for this type of appeal.
On a daily basis, I reviewed employers appeal cases. The appeals were pretty much on automatic. When I received a hearing notice my first step was to review any notes and documents (if there were any:) associated with it. I often made a recommendation to withdraw appeals and was often shot down .. because some employers simply fight everything. They're right, you're wrong and that's that.
I always looked at it as if they were playing an odds game. When the economy wasn't so bad ... people went out and found another job, maybe they didn't even collect .. they might not show up for hearings and employers would win by default .. But when the
claimant did show up .. it rarely went well for the employer, unless they could prove neglect or carelessness as the reason for the "poor performance".
I cannot tell you how many times I "had the talk" with an employer who just did not get the concept of "through no fault of their own".
They whined constantly if they lost consistently, complaining about the unfair hearing officers or wondering how a claimant got the nerve to appeal.
Just about the time they were ready to stop fighting back with frivolous appeals .. they'd win one and I could hear their ego inflate over the phone or through an email.
I do understand their dilemma, they need to keep their operating cost down and UI is just a small part of that, but some take it personally.
An HR director's job isn't to support employees, but to maintain compliance with laws and to keep the costs down .. their reputation is of importance and when they "fail to perform" they too are at risk .. irony ..
On the other hand, I also know some extremely scrupulous and or pragmatic employers, who always tried to maintain an attitude of fairness, but this was not the norm.
If you read just a few of the question here, you'll notice that firing a person for performance is common. I really don't know why they don't get it.
Whenever I think of this, I always imagine the little battery operated Bunny running into a brick wall only to back up a bit and try it again .. in hope of a different outcome .. I guess.