Getting back into work 1

[Poorpaulus]

Here's one for you...

I have been unemployed for 6 months because I got sacked from my last position. English law being a bit backward states that a company can sack you if they have "reasonable doubt". Basically, that means that you are guilty until proven innocent.

Would you employ someone that had been given the sack for stealing? I wouldn't, but then again, I didn't actually steal anything. Legally, there is nothing that I can do.

Any suggestions?

Paul.

 

[Slugger926]

Here in the states you can't get fired until you are guilty in the court of law, but you are still punished $$$ because you have to hire the lawyer to protect you. So you are still sorta guilty until proven innocent even though that is illeagal.

 

[Beggar]

To be blunt, I probably wouldn't even consider you. Unless, that is, I was having a tough time finding the right guy and you experience was a direct match.

I would say that networking is your best shot. I offered to hire an ex-con to work for me because I knew him personally and knew that he'd reformed his ways.

In your case, I'd probably avoid the subject as much as possible. When asked why you left, say something like "personal dispute." That's still not great but is better than "sacked for being a crook... but I'm innocent."

I feel for you; you're in a tough place.

--------------------
Bring back the HP-15

http://www.hp15c.org

--------------------

 

[RDK]

Canadian law allows the firing of someone based on the preponderance of evidence. It is not guilt beyond a reasonable doubt as in a court of law but a much lower standard of proof.

I would not hire you either unless I actually knew you. Therefore network like crazy and get a position with someone based on their personal knowledge of you and not the employee/employer relationship of your previous position.

Why not try flying solo for a while? Are your skills such that they can be sold on the open market? Perhaps as a sub consultant? That way the employer would get to know you with little risk.

Good luck



Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[ewh]

You could try finding a contract position. Job shops tend to be somewhat lenient as far as background, especially if you have not been formally charged or convicted. This would get you back to work, and you won't have to worry so much about it when you apply for that next permanent position.

 

[dogleg43]

I live in Indiana and it's called "employment at will" and there does not need to be a reason specified to let someone go (fired).

But more to the point, if someone calls a company and asks about an ex-employee, they rarely will give anything other than confirmation of previous employment. There have been too many lawsuits about smearing someone's name without justification.

Can you just not list this previous employer on your resume, or does too big of a hole appear in your job history?

Good luck.

 

[14159]

Geez. I don't know what yawl are talking about. Everywhere I've worked, one can be fired for any reason, which is the way I think it should be. A company is OWNED by the OWNER. It's their company and they should be able to do with it what they will. Otherwise, why own a company? It's there to make the OWNER money, not to provide employment.

14159

 

[RDK]

Sorry 14159 buy there has to be some sort of social justice in the world.

Is it right to fire someone for no reason after many years of dedicated service?

Would having a health issue that meant the person would use accumulated sick leave credits justify firing?

There is an inherent unbalance of power in the work place and the employer has to have some limits on that power for long term workers.

People take ownership of their jobs and there is some social benefit to having a measure of equality between an employer and an employee in the work place.

Where I live a person can be fired with no reason or notice in the first 6 months, from 6 to 12 months two weeks notice is required and after that the employee can only be fired for cause.

Generally firing for cause means that there has to be some sort of progressive discipline in place and that this progressive discipline has to be consistently applied across the work place. You cannot fire a long term worker the first time they are late but if you have warned them, perhaps suspended them without pay then you can fire them.

The only grounds for immediate dismissal are theft, intoxication in the work place, violence in the workplace or a serious and willful safety violation that put people at immediate danger for life or serious injury. Even these grounds can be lost to an employer if they have not been fairly enforced and applied in the past. That means that letting someone get away with theft may impair your ability to fire the next thief immediately on one occurrence.

To me these appear to be a reasonable balance in the workplace.

To go back to the original problem, why not have someone phone the former employer asking for a reference about the employee and just see what information the former employer is giving out? They may after a passage of time come to the conclusion that the OP was not the thief they thought, perhaps the same pattern of theft is still occurring, or simply developed some compassion and will not besmirch the former employee’s reputation.

I once stumbled across a HR firm’s web site that was offering this service; they would contact former employers and dig hard to get the information on a former employee. That way the former employee knew what was being said about him and could prepare for this information being released.

All that there is to lose is one phone call.




Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[wes616]

I once stumbled across a HR firm’s web site that was offering this service; they would contact former employers and dig hard to get the information on a former employee. That way the former employee knew what was being said about him and could prepare for this information being released.

All that there is to lose is one phone call.

These are great services... Saved my a$$ a few times, from former employers.

Also, I have heard that it (at least in California) is illegal for a former employer to say anything negative against you. They can say good things, or they can just say how long you were employed for and give the circumstance of your departure (fired, laid off, quit) but can not elaborate on it.

Also, if you are talking about a reference, sometimes it is acceptable to have a former co-worker be a reference from your "latest" job; as long as you have at least 1 "employer" (boss) from a previous job on your list... (but this usually works better when you are still at your current job...)

Wes C.
------------------------------
There are no engineers in the hottest parts of hell, because the existence of a 'hottest part' implies a temperature difference, and any marginally competent engineer would immediately use this to run a heat engine and make some other part of hell comfortably cool. This is obviously impossible.

 

[Beggar]

It's not that they're legally proscribed from making negative statements. It's rather that they face liability for making a statement that may be difficult to prove if sued and they see no benefit to saying anything beyond, "Yes, he worked here as an engineer from {date} to {date}" They may or may not even say whether you were fired.

--------------------
Bring back the HP-15

http://www.hp15c.org

--------------------

 

[Slugger926]

Past employers can't even say good things about you these days because if you screw up on the new job, the new employer can sue the past employer for giving you a good review beyond yes you worked here from X date to y date.

 

[RDK]

That’s why I consider reference checks to be mostly a waste of time.

The only question I want answered other than a confirmation of the dates and duties is “Would you hire this person again for a similar position?” (Yes I have had people lie about working for a company.)

The length of the pause tells me more than the answer.



Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[14159]

RKD typed: "Sorry 14159 buy there has to be some sort of social justice in the world. ...."

Thank you for your well thought-out reply, but I have to disagree. I worked for other people for about 10 years before going back to school and starting my own company at the same time, going quite well, BTW. I look at the situation from a completely different perspective now than when I was an employee.

It's a sovereignty issue. Is my new company mine or not? It is mine, period. It's there to make money for me and family. Employees (previously including myself) are commonly confused about this. Companies do not exist to employ people. Employees exist to make the company able to make money for the owner(s). It's a harsh reality, that obviously predates both of us. It took me a long time to realize this, and when I did, I took action to get on the other side of that relationship.

About the example of firing a good employee for no reason: That employee could leave a perfectly good company with no notice, for no reason, with no legal repercussions. For some companies, such an event could close down the operation, or at least make life extremely difficult. Why shouldn't there be a law that states that an employee can't "fire the company" for no reason? It's called freedom and should go both ways.

Also, what's up with this "social justice" junk? I live in the USA where we actually have something of a free market left. It's not the government's job to make policies that shift power back and forth between employers and employees (in other words, buying votes), although they unfortunately do that from time to time.

14159

 

[Beggar]

"Is the company mine or not?" I don't know? Is it incorporated, with all the benefits thereby provided? If "yes," then no, it's not.

--------------------
Bring back the HP-15

http://www.hp15c.org

--------------------

 

[14159]

Beggar:

I don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about. Can you elaborate?

BTW, HP forever!!! Not sure about the 15, though... My 48g does FFT! How's that for cool?

14159

 

[davidinindy]

This post has gotten a little off topic, but to bring it back, I'll post my opinion.
Unless they have proof, I doubt they'll give a reason for for your leaving. They may say you were fired though.
I'd do this.
Have a friend call and play the part of an HR person. Have them ask them basic questions.
Confirm dates of employment.
Maybe confirm salary history.
Reason for leaving.

I did this after hearing a past employer was giving a different reason for me leaving than I was told.
Brought some issues to light, and I called them and just mentioned slander, and that my wife works for a law firm, and that they better get their story straight.
I've had another person call since, and they only released employment dates, said they didin't have my salary information readily accessible, and that I left because of "company restructuring"... He said it sounded like they had it pretty well rehearsed. Much better.

David

 

[epoisses]

14159,
I'm afraid I don't agree either. You can't just do whatever you want even if you own a company. Contracts and transactions are subject to certain laws. If you buy a car and it breaks down the first day, the government has put a law in place that gives you the right to go back to your car dealer and claim your guarantee. Such a law is not a lack of freedom, it is considered a good thing (by most people except some car dealers I guess). An employment contract is also subject to certain constraints, which are considered a good thing by most people as well. That's because the balance of power is just not 50/50. If I lose my job, I lose 100% of my income and we (my family and I) have an immediate and major problem. If I leave my company, my direct co-workers have a bit more work to do until they find someone to replace me. No way the company loses 100% of its income.
If you want to see the blessings of a true free employment market, take a look at the Indians and Chinese construction workers in Dubai. Saw a documentary on tv, it's straight back to the middle ages, and they can't even go back home (if they had the money) because the building company takes their passports as soon as they arrive. Thank you very much free market!

 

[RDK]

If you really want a free labour market then open your borders to Mexican and Chinese and other third world immigrants.

After all if it is you company why you should not be able to hire anyone you want to do the work at any wage that you want to pay that they are willing to accept.

While you are at it, do away with any and all benefits, workplace health and safety rules etc.

Same for any licensing and product safety standards, after all if someone is willing to buy a toy that will kill their child because small parts fall off then they get what they deserve because they saved a few dollars.

Can you say total anarchy?

Like it or not there are certain social contracts and other laws and regulatory processes in place the protect people from excesses of power in the work and market place.

Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[Poorpaulus]

Thanks for your input.

I am still out of work, I am looking at permy & contract jobs. I have thought about going solo, but I think it's a bit too much of a big step for me at the moment. I am even applying for positions abroad (India & Germany) which pay REALLY well, but I still have to get past that original barrier.

 

[bioengr82]

14159-

I'm afraid I also must disagree. A system in which workers have no rights was tried and was not pretty. The reason you can not fire employees with no cause is the same reason you can not intimidate competetors, fix prices, trade with inside knowledge, etc. It is UNETHICAL . I agree, a company exists to make money, but in an equitable, lawful, and ethical mannor. Free market does not equal free-for-all.