Archived About to be fired...

Status
Not open for further replies.
But employers usually don't fire people for no reason because they will have to pay someone to not work (unemployment). If your ETL-HR fills out an initial request for information on a UI claim for a termed TM and writes that the cause for dismissal was that the boss didn't like your opinions on foreign affairs, the TM will win and it'd be a waste of time for Target to even attend the UI hearing.

This is why Target and other major companies hire third party companies to deny unemployment. I forgot the name of the company. There is one company that many corporations use. It's main focus is to lower costs of unemployment. They will dig and dig for dirt to see they can find any rule to deny people unemployment. My previous job did that to me. I owe the state $1,500 in back unemployment.

Examples of companies that their sole purpose to deny unemployment claims:
http://utcainc.com/
http://www.corporatecostcontrol.com/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
But employers usually don't fire people for no reason because they will have to pay someone to not work (unemployment). If your ETL-HR fills out an initial request for information on a UI claim for a termed TM and writes that the cause for dismissal was that the boss didn't like your opinions on foreign affairs, the TM will win and it'd be a waste of time for Target to even attend the UI hearing.

This is why Target and other major companies hire third party companies to deny unemployment. I forgot the name of the company. There is one company that many corporations use. It's main focus is to lower costs of unemployment. They will dig and dig for dirt to see they can find any rule to deny people unemployment. My previous job did that to me. I owe the state $1,500 in back unemployment.

Examples of companies that their sole purpose to deny unemployment claims:
http://utcainc.com/
http://www.corporatecostcontrol.com/
Well of course, they want to control costs, here's another one:

http://www.peoplesystems.com/

but even with the best help, no company is winning that one scenario you've given out, so a company would be foolish to fire someone for that.
 
You can directly relate the rise of at will employment to the downfall of unions. But hey, at least there's still unemployment benefits, for now anyway...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top