So they fired almost everyone today..

[ramonesfreak]

getting fired for cause is a sure way to get your UI denied....bad attitude, inappropriate language or behavior, unsavory comments etc.... kiss UI goodbye

[Christien]

Originally Posted by srandallf

getting fired for cause is a sure way to get your UI denied....bad attitude, inappropriate language or behavior, unsavory comments etc.... kiss UI goodbye

As it should be. It's insurance, not a savings account. If I burn down my house or drive my car into the lake and try to get paid by insurance, it's considered fraud. No different (or at least it shouldn't be) than deliberately getting fired.

If you want to "stand up to the man" as has been suggested, then tell your boss you want full pay and stuff the non-compete contract. If you're a valuable asset to the company, then they'll consider it. But if they consider you expendable or too expensive, then he might show you the door. It's the chance you take. Going in every day and doing a half-assed job is the Homer Simpson approach. Great role model...

[cstreit]

Steal lots of office supplies.

[GH85Carrera]

A good general rule of thumb for MOST of life's major decisions is take Sniper's advice, and then do the exact opposite. He is correct less than 4% of the time.

[porsche4life]

Originally Posted by GH85Carrera

A good general rule of thumb for MOST of life's major decisions is take Sniper's advice, and then do the exact opposite. He is correct less than 4% of the time.

4% is giving the man more credit than deserved... He's whats wrong with America quite honestly... Bull headed and ignorant.... Perfectly OK fcking the employer and the system....

[mikester]

Let's be clear, this employer most likely sucks be we do not know their circumstances only the OP's.

I am very content with taking the OP's side mostly. It is business so if it is good business for the OP to fk the employer - then so be it. They would fk him (and have).

Still - I think my advice is better business.

[A930Rocket]

Having been RIFd two years ago after 18 years with one company in residential construction, I'd take the pay cut all day long. Unemployment for a whole six months didn't pay squat compared to my salary.

[Joeaksa]

Originally Posted by porsche4life

4% is giving the man more credit than deserved... He's whats wrong with America quite honestly... Bull headed and ignorant.... Perfectly OK fcking the employer and the system....

Ahh, we hear from the voice of "age and wisdom" for a change!

You guys must be Dr. Phil! Advise that works for everyone!


Someday you all will realize that everyone is different and what works for one very well may not work for the others. Go close the door on your glass house and enjoy life gents!

[rnln]

don't quit. Keep the job, mean while, look for another one.

Originally Posted by tonypeoni

Including my old man The company was bought by a large holding company. They want to keep me and two other employees. I cant work for a company that axed my old man like a worn out coat. On top of this they want me to work for about 30% less than before and they want me to sign recourse!!

[Brian Cameron]

Originally Posted by tonypeoni

...On top of this they want me to work for about 30% less than before ...

Don't know squat about labour law south of the 49th parallel, but those suggesting you review with a lawyer are probably giving you good advice - is the new employer possibly in breach of contract?

No idea if there's any similar concept where you live, but under Canadian law (as well as in the UK), a 30% pay cut without the consent of the employee would probably be viewed as grounds for "constructive dismissal" :

"Where an employer unilaterally makes a fundamental or substantial change to an employee’s contract of employment – a change that violates the contract’s terms – the employer is committing a fundamental breach of the contract that results in its termination and entitles the employee to consider himself or herself constructively dismissed." (Supreme Court of Canada, Farber v. Royal Trust Co, 1997)

In this event, the employee should act promptly (ie, resign, or at least begin negotiations with the employer), otherwise they may be deemed to have tacitly accepted the new working conditions.

More info at wikipedia

Of course, none of the above may apply to US jurisdictions - although I'd be surprised if your laws allow an employer to unilaterally slash wages without employee consent. Anyway, if I were in your shoes I'd consult a lawyer before you do anything else, including resigning.

For what it's worth, if there's no comparable work to be found in your area, you might still be better off taking a 30% haircut than making next to nothing on unemployment. Probably what they're counting on.

best of luck,

[m21sniper]

UC is like 2 freaking years now.

He already said, "I can't stay there."

Anyone else notice that?

It seems not.

Originally Posted by GH85Carrera

A good general rule of thumb for MOST of life's major decisions is take Sniper's advice, and then do the exact opposite. He is correct less than 4% of the time.

85% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

If he cannot force himself to stay at the company that fked his dad and cut his pay 30% as he has already stated, his options are:

A) Quit, get nothing.
B) Get fired, collect UC.

All i said is, "Don't just quit, stay and get fired and collect UC before you just up and quit."

This is bad advice?

And staying and eating all his principals for a company that slahsed his pay and fired his dad (which, by the way, he said he cannot bring himself to do)...that's good advice?

Right-e-o then.

PS: Depending on his current income level UC might not be that far off what he's making now less 30%. (Then again, it might be, but i am operating from the simple premise that, as the OP stated: He cannot stay there.)

And in the real world, people get UC by getting themselves fired every day of the week. Seriously...in this environment you think anyone is turning down your UC claim to rule in favor of a company that fired virtually the entire workforce in one day? Seems extremely unlikely.

But, if my advice is so bad, and the OP can no longer work there, as he stated, his only recourse is to quit and get nothing.

[Langers]

Quote de GH85Carrera

A good general rule of thumb for MOST of life's major decisions is take Sniper's advice, and then do the exact opposite. He is correct less than 4% of the time.

4% is giving the man more credit than deserved... He's whats wrong with America quite honestly... Bull headed and ignorant.... Perfectly OK fcking the employer and the system....

couldn't have said it better myself. There is a reason he's poor as fuvk

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

UC is like 2 freaking years now.

There's a reason for that, genius. It's because in two years most people still haven't found work.

Originally Posted by m21sniper

And in the real world, people get UC by getting themselves fired every day of the week.

Yes, and where I come from we call those people cheats, liars, users, deadbeats, slackers or PART OF THE PROBLEM!

The correct thing to do in this situation is to be a man, be strong and do the best he can in the face of such difficulty and adversity. That shows class. Taking the high road is always the best solution if one can. He's better than them and if he can "shut off" his personal misgivings about the new management and just be a man and do his damn job to the best of his ability, he also gets the satisfaction of taking their money every day - and of being morally superior. All while trying to find another job somewhere else (or better still, trying to work for himself!)

I'm not a braggart type but let me share a little story here: Both my wife and I had SERIOUS issues with claiming UI even after we were legitimately laid off through no fault of our own or reason other than the economy sucked. Both of us literally waited MONTHS before finally swallowing our pride and applying for UI - and it still bugs me to this day that I ever took it, but the alternative was to not pay our rent and our bills and end up living on the street. Yes, we might have been able to stave it off another month or two by liquidating everything, but the day of reckoning was upon us - our savings, our house down payment we'd saved up, our retirement funds and our investments were all gone - completely wiped out. To zero. We did that before we ever took Dollar #1 from the government because we didn't want to be parasites on the system. In both our cases, we left thousands of dollars on the table just because the notion of taking money from the government didn't sit well with us. We didn't just rush right out and say "here, gimmee my check - whoohoo!"

Others - which you seem to lump yourself in with - seem to have no problem with this. In fact, you're advocating going out of your way and manipulating a situation simply to do it. While I don't share the above story to toot my own horn, I think the comparison/contrast speaks volumes about us and our respective values - or lack thereof. Anyone can talk tough and what-not - they need to walk the walk too in order to prove those words have any credibility or meaning. Your statements above (if true) suggest that your words and tough-guy talk about wanting smaller government and less taxes and all the rest are in fact devoid of any real meaning. It would mean you would be a hypocrite - without any loyalty to the principles to which you claim to so passionately cling and love to puff yourself up full of so regularly.

The OP needs to make a choice - take the path of what's easy and convenient or take the path of what's right and proper. Far too many take the former (think housing bubble, over-reliance on credit, "jingle mail", whatever) and look where it's gotten us. Maybe if a few people started making the difficult choice to do what's RIGHT rather than what's easy, we'd start getting the America I miss and love so much back again. He's in a lousy situation, but one that many others are as well. The pendulum for many years was on the side of the workers - jobs were abundant and employers couldn't do very much lest they lose people - and many workers exploited that. Now it's swung back the other way. This doesn't make the company's actions right, but it's just a simple reality. In time it will swing back the other way and companies like this will either go out of business or (at best) find themselves in a "revolving door syndrome" with poor morale and employee loyalty, high shrink/overhead and low productivity. You reap what you sow - and that goes for businesses too.

[Joeaksa]

Originally Posted by rnln

don't quit. Keep the job, mean while, look for another one.

Totally agree. The last thing that the family needs right now is BOTH OF YOU UNEMPLOYED!

Tuck it in, go back to work and support your family until you can find something new. Until then help your Father and family get back on their feet. Your pride may take a small dent but this is a lot larger than that.

[Groesbeck Hurricane]

Tony,

Yours is not the only company in Indiana doing this sort of thing. I am sorry it happened to you!

Lots of advice here, good and bad. This is business to the new company. They are a holding company and only look at profit margin.

I really like opening up a line of communication with them. They want a non-compete? They can pay you beyond the non-compete clause time frame.

You can refuse to sign the non-compete AND keep showing up and performing stellar service.

You can amend the non-compete to exact same position in exact same industry, make the terms VERY narrow, practically un-enforceable.

A clause can be added to make the non-compete void if they do not keep you for five years or if they do not keep you in your same capacity.

Know that the company WILL have many attorneys on their side, they probably are ones themselves.

IF it were me, I would keep showing up for work and collecting the paycheck. Doubt I would sign the non-compete agreement as it was. I would negotiate with them for as long as I could AND keep showing up. Show up early, stay a few minutes late. Be a good employee. AND Keep looking for another position.

This is a holding company, they will either carve up the equipment and information and sell it or carve up the company into smaller bits and sell it. Most will not operate the company for profit and fun.

These are just my thoughts, the truth might vary...

[targa911S]

Originally Posted by tonypeoni

It basically means that if I do choose to work for them they can sue me. I have to wait a 14 month period before finding work in the SAME field

non competes seldom hold up. are you in a right to work state?

[s_morrison57]

I may be wrong but any non-compete clause was to prevent an employee from quiting and starting his own company doing the same thing as his former employer was doing and not leaving one company to go work for the next, if it was me I'd sign the contract with a 14 month no dismissal term at a 30% increase, if they don't like it then they can fire you.
I've quit lots of jobs, no notice, tell them in the morning that today is my last, always been offered more money to stay and most times it was about money, I still always left and never worried about working in the same industry, if you have skill there is always work.

[smokintr6]

4% is giving the man more credit than deserved... He's whats wrong with America quite honestly... Bull headed and ignorant.... Perfectly OK fcking the employer and the system....

I'm going to say this, and I don't mean any disrespect, and I'm not actually trying to back sniper.... But, you are still pretty young, and you have snagged a job recently either because you are a stand-out or because you are lucky. Either way, if the economy does not pick up soon and you ever have to experience what it is like to have your employer stand on the wind pipe of your dreams... your rosey disposition may fade a little.

I have hated my job for about a year now, my boss is rude to me and all of our customers (he is barred from enterening plants). He is sloppy, makes bad decisions, and is bad for our department... BUT there is not much out there, so I get up every day pull myself up by my boot straps and do my job the best I can. At this point Im probably giving about 70% just because I'm so dull from being up all hours searching for jobs. The funny thing is I still actually feel bad about it...a little. I'm also not sure this has been a character building experience. I'm learning to do just enough work not to have to speak with my boss at all.

Good luck to the OP, you are now in a spot that no one envys.

[BGCarrera32]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

I'm not a braggart type but let me share a little story here: Both my wife and I had SERIOUS issues with claiming UI even after we were legitimately laid off through no fault of our own or reason other than the economy sucked. Both of us literally waited MONTHS before finally swallowing our pride and applying for UI - and it still bugs me to this day that I ever took it, but the alternative was to not pay our rent and our bills and end up living on the street. Yes, we might have been able to stave it off another month or two by liquidating everything, but the day of reckoning was upon us - our savings, our house down payment we'd saved up, our retirement funds and our investments were all gone - completely wiped out. To zero. We did that before we ever took Dollar #1 from the government because we didn't want to be parasites on the system. In both our cases, we left thousands of dollars on the table just because the notion of taking money from the government didn't sit well with us. We didn't just rush right out and say "here, gimmee my check - whoohoo!

Taking UI sucks. However, you sound like its a total welfare handout yet it's anything but. It is in fact a tax that is assessed to your employer as they are required to report your earnings- top income earners are capped and those don't make as much don't receive the max benefit. It is not welfare and is designed to help maintain a standard of living during temporary lapses of employment. Now I'm not sure that stretching the bennies out to 2 years is smart as one could argue that it enables a behavior that keeps people from looking for work, but...I see nothing particularly noble about running your savings and assets all the way down to zero either.

And the money is not the governments, it is yours (the peoples). The quicker people get back to the mentality that government has no money of their own the quicker we get back on track as a country.

[island911]

Tony, I wouldn't sign a non-compete (in that situation) unless I knew it would be void due to coercion. (or whatever the lawyers call it these days).

I would also look at all those laid-off as a great potential new company. (which is likely why they want a no compete agreement from you).