I agree that unemployment benefits aren’t the metaphorical ejector seat here. But, regarding “fired” vs “laid off,” at least in California, you’re generally eligible for unemployment benefits even if you were fired, as long as you weren’t fired for illegal or malicious activity. In particular, if you didn’t care about losing a reference and burning bridges, you could get fired for poor performance and still collect unemployment. I can’t think of a plausible situation where it would be beneficial, but you could certainly do it.
To the contrary, you generally have to get fired to receive benefits unless you are quitting for exceptional reasons. To deny your unemployment claims after you've been fired or laid off, your employer has to dispute your claim and demonstrate serious conduct breaches while under oath. If you quit for general dissatisfaction, you're not covered.
Not sure if this is true in all states, but in mine getting fired for cause disqualifies you from receiving unemployment. You have to be laid off/terminated by no fault of your own.
This is not accurate. Getting fired versus laid-off are different; it's important to understand this. For one, if you're communicating with a professional and express that you were fired, they will make much different assumptions than if you were laid-off. Second, the distinction can affect your eligibility for employment insurance (or 'unemployment').
You don't get unemployment if you're fired for cause, only if you're laid off.
Violate your employer's rules, get fired, no unemployment for you. Very simple.
I don't think people are being careful about the terminology here. Firing could mean terminating employment because someone is no longer needed (what you are calling 'laid off') but it can also mean terminating employment because they broke some rules or laws (i.e. didn't show up for work, harrased co-workers, etc).
If you are fired "with cause" (i.e. you did something wrong) you aren't eligible for unemployment. If you quit you are not eligible for unemployment. Only if you are fired "without cause" are you eligible for unemployment payments.
If you are a member of a labor union, there are usually some mandatory negotiations involved around terminations. Otherwise, you can quit any job at a moment's notice, as well as being terminated the same way, although there are often two-week notices (including wages) given both ways by convention.
If you quit, or are fired for cause, you are not eligible for unemployment compensation. If you are laid off for "lack of work", then yes.
Oddly enough, in the US it's legally advantageous for a company to disguise a firing as a layoff, but not the other way around.
Why? Because if you get laid off, you can collect unemployment, but if you get fired for cause, you can't. But if you think the company pretended they had cause when they didn't, you can appeal, and the company will have to spend considerable resources defending their position that they had cause. As such, many employers legally classify all firings as layoffs because it's often not worth the hassle. And there's no penalties to doing so, either.
So if you get fired but the company officially considers it a layoff, it's a good thing for you: you dodged a bullet.
reply