The bad news is you're not being laid off

[Evo]

So, my company, has to downsize again. We had a meeting today, expecting to be given the option to take a voluntary layoff, which is a package that would include 6 months of pay and benefits, minimum, or stay and risk firing.

NOPE.

They told us that instead of offering us a lay off package, where we might have some chance of having enough money and benefits to hold us over until we can find another job, they are, instead, doubling our quotas so that no one will be able to meet them and be fired. Our director was actually laughing as he said, so no one is at risk of being laid off (and getting a compensation package), your risk is of being fired, (without compensation), if you do not meet the new doubled quotas.

YAY!

 

[turbo]

I am so glad that I don't own stock in your lame company! With a 2-person sales department, I made over $1.25M/yr net profit for the owner for 3 years running, and he claimed that he had to slash my pay by 1/2 and give the money to his sister (my admin asst.) because she had to "work so much harder" when I wasn't on-site. When I took that job, the division was wimpy. After a couple of years, it dwarfed the income of all the other three other divisions combined. It took a lot of personal attention and frequent contacts with older and/or eccentric collectors to make that work. I hope his new employees don't figure that out, so he will plunge back to the depths of the <10% market share very soon.

 

[Jimmy]

They told us that instead of offering us a lay off package, where we might have some chance of having enough money and benefits to hold us over until we can find another job, they are, instead, doubling our quotas so that no one will be able to meet them and be fired. Our director was actually laughing as he said, so no one is at risk of being laid off (and getting a compensation package), your risk is of being fired, without compensation, if you do not meet the new doubled quotas.

YAY!

Man, that really steams me and I wish you the best of luck. I don't suppose there is any legal recourse in a situation like that.

 

[Evo]

Really ? I wish you luck !

This is actually the second quota doubling since January of this year. Two weeks ago, they made us sign a document agreeing that we could not work more than 8 hours a day, or we would be fired, and not reporting time worked would result in firing. So working enough hours to make the increased quota, even if you do it on your own time, will result in being fired.

In order to meet the first quota doubling, many of us chose to work unpaid hours to complete the new requirement of quadrupled reports and still produce the amount of increased results they required.

 

[Evo]

Man, that really steams me and I wish you the best of luck. I don't suppose there is any legal recourse in a situation like that.

I think they may be facing a lawsuit, the amount of work they are requiring absolutely cannot be done within the constraints of a 40 hour week.

 

[lisab]

Oh no, this is just awful ! I feel so bad for you.

There must be legal recourse for you...perhaps you can pool with your coworkers to get legal advice?

 

[Sorry!]

Just wondering what exactly is your job Evo?

This seems extremely unfair and I hope the big fat hammer of justice comes swinging down on this company.

 

[Moonbear]

This is actually the second quota doubling since January of this year. Two weeks ago, they made us sign a document agreeing that we could not work more than 8 hours a day, or we would be fired, and not reporting time worked would result in firing. So working enough hours to make the increased quota, even if you do it on your own time, will result in being fired.

In order to meet the first quota doubling, many of us chose to work unpaid hours to complete the new requirement of quadrupled reports and still produce the amount of increased results they required.

So you might have legal recourse if they've basically created conflicting policies that don't allow you to adhere to either one. Someone should have recorded the meeting so you could prove they were just trying to do an end-run around the law. You should spread the word to everyone in the office to start documenting all unpaid hours worked so that if anyone makes that doubled quota, everyone else can show it required working unpaid hours when you sue the company for a severance package and lost benefits.

In these economic times, that's entirely unacceptable to deprive people of the lay-off benefits they would be entitled to when they know they have to lay off people. And, with that sort of bad management, they DESERVE to shut down (but the employees don't deserve to be left cold on the street).

Sounds like it's time to whip together your resume and see what else is out there. I wouldn't even give them the courtesy of two-weeks' notice if you find something, just go in on payday, collect your paycheck, and tell them "The good news is, you can fire one less person, I won't be back."

Good luck!

 

[Dembadon]

I think they nmay be facing a lawsuit, the amount of work they are requiring absolutely cannot be done within the constraints of a 40 hour week.

I don't think you guys would have much trouble convincing a judge that this is absolutely ludicrous. In this economy, I'm willing to bet that a judge / jury would rule in your favor without batting an eye.

I'd even go out on a limb to say that they could be violating some labor law(s) with their outrageous requirements.

This is pure speculation on my part, but I don't think that a judge would look very kindly on a company that bullies it's employees like this, especially with the economy being as poor as it is.

 

[Dembadon]

... Sounds like it's time to whip together your resume and see what else is out there. I wouldn't even give them the courtesy of two-weeks' notice if you find something, just go in on payday, collect your paycheck, and tell them "The good news is, you can fire one less person, I won't be back."

Good luck!

I second this.

 

[xxChrisxx]

Do you guys not have an equivilant of constructive dismissal?

 

[Jimmy]

I think they may be facing a lawsuit, the amount of work they are requiring absolutely cannot be done within the constraints of a 40 hour week.

I certainly hope it works out to the benefit of you and your fellow co-workers. I've worked for a company that has pulled the same type of crap and I know how you feel.

 

[Dembadon]

Do you guys not have an equivilant of constructive dismissal?

Evo; xxChrisxx brings up a good point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_dismissal

Your company's behavior would surely fall into such a category.

 

[sas3]

I think they may be facing a lawsuit, the amount of work they are requiring absolutely cannot be done within the constraints of a 40 hour week.

That really sucks, The company where I have worked for over 20 years is going through an outsourcing deal right now only they are calling it an optimization, as if that will change the meaning.
It’s all about the money for these companies.
How long have you worked there EVO?

Any lawyers on this site?

 

[GeorginaS]

Do you guys not have an equivilant of constructive dismissal?

I third this. Evo's situation absolutely falls within these parametres. Does the US have any equivalent to it?

 

[turbo]

Almost all employment in the US is construed as "at-will" and your employment can be terminated at any time with any or no cause.

 

[Moonbear]

I third this. Evo's situation absolutely falls within these parametres. Does the US have any equivalent to it?

I can't find anything like that, nor have I heard anything like that in the US before. I don't think there's any law protecting you if you get fed up and leave before you get fired.

On the other hand, not paying people for working more than 40 hours a week when they do in fact need to work additional hours to complete their job responsibilities IS a clear violation of US labor laws. Your employee contract cannot waive federal labor law rights, or it is an invalid contract.

 

[Sorry!]

I can't find anything like that, nor have I heard anything like that in the US before. I don't think there's any law protecting you if you get fed up and leave before you get fired.

On the other hand, not paying people for working more than 40 hours a week when they do in fact need to work additional hours to complete their job responsibilities IS a clear violation of US labor laws. Your employee contract cannot waive federal labor law rights, or it is an invalid contract.

This is true. You are not allowed to sign off on any given labour law rights ever. If I were you I would contact whichever board in your area takes care of labour laws and tell them the situation. It normally takes a little bit of time (here in Canada it takes 6-8 weeks) but in your case I think it would be well worth the time. Not only will you possibly be protecting your lay off benefits you should also receieve some sort of compensation for hours worked but not paid for.

 

[rootX]

I know quite a few companies where you cannot work more than 40 hours. But, I am not sure how much workload is required.

 

[Math Is Hard]

Evo, there's always a position for you in Bora Bora with my future Kayak rental agency.

I'm pretty scared here, too. Sent out another resume just a little while ago. Our organization just hired a receptionist with a master's degree. geez! I don't know how I can compete out there. I'm probably up against MBAs and PhDs.

 

[rootX]

I'm pretty scared here, too. Sent out another resume just a little while ago. Our organization just hired a receptionist with a master's degree. geez!

Masters in what?

 

[Sorry!]

Evo, there's always a position for you in Bora Bora with my future Kayak rental agency.

I'm pretty scared here, too. Sent out another resume just a little while ago. Our organization just hired a receptionist with a master's degree. geez! I don't know how I can compete out there. I'm probably up against MBAs and PhDs.

When I worked at McDonalds I worked with someone who had a masters as well. Crazy world isn't it? They were a cashier and I got to boss them around when I was 18

 

[Math Is Hard]

Masters in what?

Education. I met him. He's a very sharp guy. He should be doing more than answering phones and making appointments.

 

[Office_Shredder]

I hear stories like this and it makes me really glad that I'm just starting my Phd (with 5 years guaranteed funding)

Kind of echoy but contact a lawyer to see what options you have... I wouldn't wait for someone else to do that first. Sometimes these kinds of complaints can take a looooong time and you want your money sooner rather than later

 

[Vanadium 50]

Hi Evo,

I am not a lawyer, and even if I were, not knowing where you live would make me incapable of giving you legal advice. You should probably consult one.

That said, it sounds like the employer is setting unreasonably high standards in order to fire you for cause, denying you unemployment insurance, and keeping his rates down. You may or may not have some recourse against that.

Where it looks like you have some recourse - at least to my untrained eye - is that the employer's policy is likely in violation of the FLSA, which (provided the law applied to him and at least one affected employee is non-exempt) is a big headache for them. If they are essentially requiring people to work "off the books" to meet their quotas, it's a clear violation. If they are even permitting people to work off the books, it's a violation. In fact, just "turning a blind eye" to this is a violation.

In this case, the documents that you have signed have (the courts have ruled) worked against the employer, as it demonstrates the the violation is both knowing and willfull.

Furthermore, if you report it, your employer may not retaliate in any way. Any negative actions against you will be judged in this light.

 

[GeorginaS]

I can't find anything like that, nor have I heard anything like that in the US before. I don't think there's any law protecting you if you get fed up and leave before you get fired.

Yeah, see, it's not a question of getting fed up and leaving before you get fired, it's an issue of an employer creating a work situation -- with unreasonable job requirements (which you didn't sign on for initially) -- such that they put employees into a position that they are forced to quit rather than be fired or laid off. It's an underhanded employer maneuvre that "constructive dismissal" is supposed to guard against. Like Evo's situation of being handed an impossible task, and ensuring that the task is entirely impossible by making them sign documents in which they agree not to work over 40 hours a week in order to meet the demands of the unreasonable standards.

In other words, the employer is deliberately, and rather clearly, setting up a situation in which "dismissal with cause" is viable or people simply quit because the situation is intolerable. That's not allowed here. It's not really fickle.

 

[Borek]

Finger's crossed Evo, I can't do much more from here but send positive fluids towards Kansas

 

[sportsstar469]

good luck evo/

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

I'd say contact the labour board first. See what they say about it.

If you give them a hard time they can still fire you all they have to do is find some other reason to fire you. Maybe like being out sick or injured too often. ;-p

That's the problem with these sorts of issues here in the US is that no one can really make them keep you on as an employee. So when you have a problem with an employer most often all you can do is look for another job. The specifics of the local labour laws would determine whether or not you can sue but if you have not been fired yet you may not be able to sue and suing isn't going to get you your money (minus lawyers fees) until later.

Your best avenue would likely be to talk to your fellow employees about bringing a class action against the company, if you can sue. One of you can collect some money from everyone who can afford it and go, as a representative, to a labour law lawyer and buy an hour or two to talk about the possibility of a class action. Unfortunately if the company goes under and declares bankruptcy you may not get anything.

 

[xxChrisxx]

This sucks that an employee can be treated that way. Is there a union or something that helps employee with this kind of situation? I'm not talkign industiral action, just a support network for your options?