I Quit – No, Wait, I Don’t

Employers might welcome a notice of resignation from a troublesome employee as a simple solution to a problem. But what are the ramifications when the employee tries to rescind his resignation?

In most cases the better choice will be to reject the rescission and hold the employee to his resignation.  Ensuing litigation may have to be settled or defended, but the potential harm to morale and productivity from an unhappy and resentful employee will be avoided.  As one of our senior partners in employment law was fond of saying, if an employee will be trouble whether he is inside or outside, put him outside.

Moreover, courts in wrongful discharge cases have supported employers who reject rescission of a notice of resignation.  An employee who quits can attempt to bring a wrongful termination claim against the employer on a theory called “constructive discharge.”  Constructive discharge occurs when the employer intentionally creates a working atmosphere which is so intolerable that a reasonable person would be forced to resign.  However, courts have held that an employee who seeks to rescind a notice of resignation and remain in the workplace has in effect admitted that the workplace was not intolerable, which defeats the claim of constructive discharge.

Also, in order for a former employee to make a claim of employment discrimination, he must show that he has suffered an adverse employment action.  Ordinarily, termination is a classic adverse employment action.  However, courts have held that the refusal to permit an employee to rescind a resignation is not considered an adverse employment action.  There is no grace period allowed by law in which an employee is free to reconsider a notice of resignation;  it is not an adverse employment action for the employer to take the resigning employee at his word.

On the other hand (in employment law, there is usually an “other hand”), different principles apply to claims for unemployment compensation.  A person who voluntarily quits his job is usually not eligible for unemployment compensation benefits.  Nevertheless, by state regulation [31-236-18], a person who gives a notice of resignation and then attempts to rescind it before the expiration of the notice period is not considered to have quit voluntarily and is therefore eligible to collect unemployment benefits, unless the employer has made a commitment to a replacement in the meantime.

The regulation also provides that a person who gives a notice of resignation but who is discharged before the end of the notice period will be eligible for benefits unless his employer pays him the full amount that would have been earned during the period of notice.

Acknowledging that every situation will be different, often the best response to a notice of resignation delivered by a problematic employee is to make the resignation effective immediately, pay out the notice period, and wish him luck in his future endeavors.  But even when an employee who is still working during the notice period tries to rescind the resignation, the better response is usually to reject the rescission and carry out the separation.  There may not even be much exposure to an unemployment compensation claim, since employees usually have another job lined up before they resign.  And it is almost always better to allow a trouble-maker to remove himself from the premises than to fire him later on and have to deal with a wrongful termination claim.

Posted in Termination

This blog/web site presents general information only. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice, and you should not consider or rely on it as such. You should consult an attorney for individual advice regarding your own situation. This website is not an offer to represent you. You should not act, or refrain from acting, based upon any information at this website. Neither our presentation of such information nor your receipt of it creates nor will create an attorney-client relationship with any reader of this blog. Any links from another site to the blog are beyond the control of Pullman & Comley, LLC and do not convey their approval, support or any relationship to any site or organization. Any description of a result obtained for a client in the past is not intended to be, and is not, a guarantee or promise the firm can or will achieve a similar outcome.

PDF
Subscribe to Updates

About Our Labor, Employment and Employee Benefits Law Blog

Alerts, commentary, and insights from the attorneys of Pullman & Comley’s Labor, Employment Law and Employee Benefits practice on such workplace topics as labor and employment law, counseling and training, litigation, immigration law and union issues, as well as employee benefits and ERISA matters.

Other Blogs by Pullman & Comley

Connecticut Health Law Blog

Education Law Notes

For What It May Be Worth

Recent Posts

Archives

Jump to Page