Ambiguous Circumstances Surrounding My 'Termination'

[Nepenthean]

My question involves unemployment benefits for the state of: Arizona

Hello all. I just want to extend my appreciation for this forum and its posters. I will do my best to be succinct; however, I may have to elaborate. Please forgive that.

Here is my situation:

I was granted unemployment benefits, which my employer is appealing. I have been employed by a medical office for a couple of years. Upon employment inception, I was told, "I need you to sign this," referring to a document stating I understood I was an 'at-will' employee and could be terminated for cause or no cause. In view of this, I normally would concede; however, could the word 'need' be construed to mean 'if you do not sign, then employment may be withheld'? Could this be undue influence?
Is this document considered a contract inasmuch as only my name appears on it?

One day a co-worker called my boss up to say I quit, though I did not articulate anything remotely similar. Then when I appeared for work, he said he thought I quit and that was why he called the manager.

Upon timely arrival for work, I was told, "We have coverage for your shifts." I asked if this was permanent of my direct report, and the response was, "I do not know, just in general." The one who fired me was the office manager. The one who said "I do not know" is my supervisor.

So, do the circumstances surrounding my termination have merit? Or does the signed document indemnify my employer? There is more, but I would like to see if the document is their ace in the hold. To me, it seems it is.


Much appreciation.

[Betty3]

I don't see undue influence in this situation. Whether you signed the form or not in at-will employment you can be terminated at any time for any reason except a reason prohibited by law (ie age, religion, gender) or unless you have a binding employment contract or CBA to the contrary. Also, it would not have been illegal to not offer you a job if you wouldn't sign the form - I doubt if you were singled out to sign the form due to being a member of a protected "class" (age, religion, race).

During the unemployment appeal, all you can do is answer the questions asked you truthfully. This may be an unfair termination (if you didn't yourself give notice to quit) but not an illegal one.

Good luck.

[BOR]

So, do the circumstances surrounding my termination have merit? Or does the signed document indemnify my employer? There is more, but I would like to see if the document is their ace in the hold. To me, it seems it is.


Much appreciation.

Since you were awarded benefits, it seems the termination, although legal, was not for "just/good cause". No one can quit for you, as a general rule, YOU have to do it, either by word or action or non action. You showed up, so it was evident you did not quit.

Redundantly, if a person is fired without cause they may be eligible for unemployment, as odd as it may sound.

The signed contract/statment is simply an affirmation of state law, nothing else.


Bottom line, you were not liked, so you were fired. Employers lie out thier teeth when sued or an employee excercises any right under the law.

The signed document does NOT indemnify your employer.

As a matter of fact, you will find most employment applications in todays world specifically outlines the fact you are an at will employee and either party can terminate the employment relationship at any time. If you do not sign the application you may not be hired, whether it states about at will or not.

Of course, this is a message board, not a court and or a state agency, but my 2 cents is, you are clear given the facts as posted.

[Nepenthean]

Thanks BOR and Betty!

My appeal hearing is 12-17. Is there a standardized structure? I was considering the following about the document I signed and undue influence. My boss said, "I have some papers you need to sign." All papers she presented are papers I needed to sign, including tax forms, vaccination forms, etc. Tax forms NEED to be signed. Vaccination forms NEED to be signed. One of the last documents she presented was the document indicating temporary status, which Bor pointed out does nothing but restate law. Could I assert the necessity TO sign was implicit if she contends my signing was voluntary? But all this is moot anyway if it matters not if I signed the document.

Also, it would not have been illegal to not offer you a job if you wouldn't sign the form

Could I say as a new hire, I wanted to put my most prepossessing foot forward instead of launching into a quagmire of suspicion, and I feared job loss if I did not sign?


My boss is claiming the following sentences from an email almost 6 hours after I was disallowed entry into the building is how I resigned.

"My venture at ________ has come to an abrupt end it seems. I wished to stay, yet I could only work certain days, days the other techs and JJ seemed compatible with at first. For some reason their sentiments changed and, knowing I could only work certain hours, decided if I could not abide by the enforced schedule, my 1.5 year temporary position must end."

She is claiming this is my resignation. The words, 'it seems' suggest past or present uncertainty. It suggests the author is observing something happening TO him instead of him making a positive declaration. For the italicized sentence, does the antecedent of 'decided' seem to an implied 'I'? That was not what I intended. I wanted to convey the 'they' in 'their', so it was meant to impart 'they decided'.

What do you think?

To illustrate the usage intended consider this:

His dog barked and, knowing I was deaf, allowed it to continue.

Yet, I think this message is irrelevant since a resignation is unnecessary after a clear discharge 6 hours earlier.

[Betty3]

I still don't see where the employer did anything illegal. However, that doesn't mean you will not be granted unemployment ins. You just need to tell the truth as to what happened during the appeal - the "state" will make the decision whether to grant benefits or not. We have no way of knowing.

Good luck to you.

[BOR]

Yet, I think this message is irrelevant since a resignation is unnecessary after a clear discharge 6 hours earlier.

The employer appears to be fishing, as you were already awarded the intial claim, the facts support you.

[Betty3]

Agree, and generally the unemployment ins. people tend to lean toward the employee.

[Nepenthean]

Thanks. I will keep you posted.

[Nepenthean]

This morning my hearing was scheduled at 8am. I called in; the judge called me at 8 10 ready to start the hearing. However, the appellant did not show. Consequently, of course, he ruled in my favor.

All that prep work in the way of citing revised statutes and admin code to not even be able to argue or question my former employer.

Oh well. So 960$ a month from the state. But I am in the process of deliberating on two job offers. My former employer will its experience rating increased not matter how much money I withdrew? Does anybody know how much more it their rating will increase in Az?

thanks for the commentary.

[callumny]

Thanks BOR and Betty!

To illustrate the usage intended consider this:

His dog barked and, knowing I was deaf, allowed it to continue.

That sentence is grammatically incorrect. It should say, "His dog barked, and, knowing I was deaf, he allowed it to continue." What your example says is:
"His dog barked."
"Knowing I was deaf, his dog allowed it to continue."
You can't omit the subject unless you have already mentioned it.

Also, the document you were freaking out over is totally irrelevant. Your employer has the right to terminate you at will. That doesn't mean you're ineligible for unemployment. It just means you don't get to work there anymore. It's nothing at all to do with your unemployment insurance.

So please, when you get your next job, don't freak out when they ask you to sign a similar form.