Terminated for Unsatisfactory Performance - CA
I am on a final warning for unsatisfactory work performance. In speaking with my boss I am going to be terminated this month for it and there is really nothing I can do to prevent that. That's just how it works with my company.
I received an Inconsistently Effective on my first and only annual review in March for failure to effectively Manage Talent, and my Inability to Manage execution, which are the leadership areas mentioned on my warning and final warning.
I have done everything possible to try and keep the job. The good news is that I have been documenting all of my efforts for the past 30, I wrote an action plan, attempted to execute that action plan, sent daily updates to my supervisor, created a leadership status, sent in a final copy with performance notes. I have all of this documentation as well.I have read all the guidelines for my state of California
However I am interested in hearing your interpretation.
What are my chances of UI? I am afraid it could fall under reoccurring acts of ordinary neg. and I could be denied. Although nothing i have done is willful, I attempted to the best of my abilities to execute the core roles of my job.
Thank you for your time,
It's always the same. Poor performance is not the same as neglect of duties.
The documentation I always requested to prove that what an employer called poor performance was in fact a neglect of duties was a satisfactory performance review, prior to the PIP (performance improvement plan) which generally, as you stated, leads to discharge. And the documentation often
tries to support that the employee had a neglectful attitude about improving.
Nonetheless, I was always surprised when people were denied at a hearing (usually scheduled due to the employer's appeal) even when I could see clearly, that the real problem was "inability" to meet the employer's expectations.
I always accredited these employer wins to the employer hearing rep I assigned. (I had my favorites)
Without seeing your documentation .. I have no idea if it would help or damage your case, but I do however, stress the use of words such as "inability" and "unable" "tried to the best of my ability" instead of saying things like .. "I knew I should have, but"
One thing that employers like to avoid is discussing recent changes to the position the employee held or the metrics and quotas or the workload which the employee was required to perform to.
Sometimes .. the differences in the latter two amounts to unreasonable changes that can be used to reasonably support INABILITY.
The only thing I can stress for certain is .. don't quit ..
Many people do at the very end, just because they know discharge is inevitable, but the difference is the difference between a quit in lieu of discharge or a quit in anticipation of discharge.
One allows a legitimate argument that the poor performance was due to inability and when there is no choice allowed to save your job by the employer. This must be adjudicated as a discharge ..
Quitting in anticipation is a quit without good cause because by all documentary appearances .. you still had time to work on improving your performance to preserve the job.