Key to predicting how an unemployment claim or other type of employment action might turn out is the ability to understand the circumstances under which an employee leaves the company. The nature of the work separation determines to a large extent how a claim or lawsuit will be handled. The purpose of this brief article is to summarize the most important ways in which TWC analyzes work separations, but other laws will be mentioned where appropriate. Additional information on this topic can be found in the next section of this book, "Post-Employment Problems", in the articles dealing specifically with unemployment claims.
Voluntary or Involuntary?
The first thing to do is determine whether a work separation is voluntary or involuntary. This is important not only because TWC applies different standards to voluntary and involuntary work separations, but because many companies' benefit plans provide different outcomes depending upon the circumstances in which an employee leaves employment.
A work separation is voluntary if initiated by the employee. An employee initiates the work separation if he or she basically sets the ball rolling toward a work separation. In a true voluntary work separation, the employee has more control than the employer over the fact and the timing of leaving the work. That can happen several different ways:
As long as the employer did not pressure the employee into resigning, work separations that occur under those circumstances may be considered voluntary.
Focus: Job Abandonment
There is no official definition of job abandonment in the statute or the TWC regulations. It is mentioned in the following TWC precedent cases: Appeal No. 97-004610-10-042497, VL 135.05(6); Appeal No. 1197-CA-71, VL 450.02(2); Appeal No. MR 86-2479-10-020687, MC 90.00; and Appeal No. 764254-2, MC 135.05 (cross-listed at VL 135.05). The concept of job abandonment is generally defined by each company in its employee handbook. The basic idea is to set a limit for the number of days an employee can be completely out of contact with the company, beyond which the company will presume that the employee has decided not to return to work at all. Most companies define job abandonment as absence without notice for three or more days in a row. Such work separations are generally considered voluntary, although TWC may view certain job abandonment-caused work separations as involuntary, depending upon how the claimant and employer explain their respective positions and on what the facts show.
A work separation is involuntary if initiated by the employer. An employer initiates a work separation by taking some kind of action that makes it clear to the employee that continued employment will not be an option past a certain date. In such a situation, the employer has more control than the employee over the fact and the timing of leaving the work. There are many ways in which a work separation can be involuntary:
The question of whether a claimant quit or was fired is very important. It determines who has the burden of proof in the case. The burden of proof in an unemployment claim falls on the party that initiated the work separation. If a claimant quit, he has the burden of proving that he had good cause connected with the work to resign when he did. If the claimant was fired, the employer has the burden of proving 1) that the discharge resulted from a specific act of misconduct connected with the work that happened close in time to the discharge and 2) that the claimant either knew or should have known she could be fired for such a reason.
Sometimes the circumstances are murky, and it is unclear exactly what happened. Here are some hints as to how TWC will rule:
Two-Week Notice Rule Top of Page
The amount of notice can be important in a TWC case. The rule followed by the Commission recognizes that two weeks' notice is standard in most industries. If the employee gives notice of intent to resign by a definite date two weeks or less in the future and you accept the notice early at your convenience, it will be regarded as a resignation, not a discharge. If more than two weeks' notice is given, but you wait until two weeks or less before the effective date of resignation to accept the notice early, then you would have a good chance of having TWC regard the work separation as a resignation, although not all claim examiners and hearing officers agree. Also, if the employee gives more than two weeks' notice, and you accept it more than two weeks in advance, but you pay wages in lieu of notice for the rest of the notice period, then the situation will still be judged a quit, not a discharge. However, if more than two weeks' notice is given, and you accept the notice more than two weeks in advance without paying wages in lieu of notice (payment for a notice period not worked is not required unless such a payment is promised in writing), the situation is likely to be considered a discharge, with the burden of proof falling squarely on you to prove misconduct connected with the work if you feel that the claimant should be disqualified from UI benefits. Much would depend upon the individual facts in the case.
The same rule works in reverse when an employer gives advance notice of a layoff or termination. If the notice is two weeks or less, and the employee accepts the notice by leaving within the two-week period, the work separation will still be considered involuntary, and the employer will have to prove misconduct if the claimant is to be disqualified from unemployment benefits. However, if the notice is longer than two weeks, and the employee leaves ahead of the final two-week period, the work separation would presumably be voluntary in nature, and the employee would have the burden of proving good cause connected with the work for resigning. For more details on how TWC applies the two-week notice rule, see section 135.25 in both the Misconduct and the Voluntary Leaving chapters of the agency's Appeals Policy and Precedent Manual.
Sometimes employees give murky resignation notices (open-ended, or giving employers multiple options). If the company has the luxury of needing the employee to actually stay, it can try the following to minimize the risk of a "layoff at the employer's convenience" ruling:
All of this would be aimed at getting a real resignation letter with a definite date of resignation two weeks or less in the future. Adopt a policy informing employees that no open-ended notices of resignation will be accepted - any notice of resignation must contain a definite date of last work. The policy should remind employees to use caution in submitting a letter of resignation, because once the employer takes action on it, it may be too late to rescind the notice.
It can be difficult for a company to protect itself in a resignation case and "prove" that an employee quit, if the employee refuses to give a written notice of resignation, or else leaves under circumstances that make it unlikely that the employee will cooperate and give the company a letter of resignation after the fact. In many such cases, the ex-employee later alleges the company fired them. The most common situation involves a resigning employee quitting without notice, informing only a coworker of that fact, and leaving the employer with no resignation letter to prove it was a resignation. Invariably, the sudden resignation causes one or more coworkers to have to work extra hours. To document that the employee resigned, have the coworker write a memo to the employer explaining the call or contact with the ex-employee and why the coworker worked the extra time:
"Dear [Boss], This is just to let you know that the reason I [came into work] [came to work earlier than usual] [worked past my usual end time] today was because ________ called me and said she was quitting and that I needed to cover for her. I worked from ____ to ____, a total of __ hours. I didn't want you to think that I was trying to work outside my schedule. Just let me know if you need me to continue covering for ______." [Note: this is only a sample. Use your own words.]
Such a memo serves two purposes: 1) it explains why the coworker worked outside the schedule; and 2) more importantly, it increases the credibility of the assertion that the employee quit, in case the employee disputes that fact in an unemployment claim. Ideally, the coworker would be available later to give firsthand testimony confirming what he or she wrote in the memo. Of course, such a memo will not cover every possible resignation-without-notice situation, but it is an example of how an employer can think outside the box to give itself a little more protection in resignation cases.
In close cases, most administrative agencies such as TWC decide that the work separation was involuntary. Employers should be prepared with both documentation and witnesses to prove their cases either way in the event of a dispute over the nature of the work separation.