Careers

Can you be fired without pay after giving two weeks notice

  • Last Updated:
  • Feb 10th, 2019 2:18 pm
Sr. Member
Jun 8, 2007
940 posts
183 upvotes
Mississauga
Some good info in this thread. Lots of bad info. Let's fix some of the latter.
kcorscadden wrote:
Dec 28th, 2018 9:32 am
Technically, they fired him, he didn't quit so he may be eligible for severance pay. I am sure the ROE will say he quit cause he did give his 2 weeks notice. As for the 2 weeks pay, no he won't get it cause they fired him, but he should get severance pay in lieu of those 2 weeks.
Being asked to leave immediately is not the same as being fired. It's very common for soon-to-be-former employees to be told they do not need to work their notice period and still be paid out. That said, they are still required to be paid out if this is the case. The RoE will very likely show resignation, but it's possible that it could indicate dismissal. If it did indicate dismissal, OP would have a really good case for wrongful dismissal since the resignation doesn't appear to have been formally accepted and being walked out can be seen as an on-the-spot termination. He could be owed both two weeks of termination pay and 10 days of severance pay under the CLC if this was found to be a not-for-cause termination. (But this probably isn't the case)
eldiablo wrote:
Dec 28th, 2018 9:45 am

Was he holding a full-time job at the time when he gave the employer two weeks notice?
Is the job unionized (very likely it is not)?
Full time vs part time doesn't matter when it comes to notice period. What matters is the length of time you've been employed. In federally-regulated workplaces like banks, the 3-month and 12-month marks make differences when it comes to termination and severance pay (they're not the same thing.)

Unionization makes a huge difference, but that could go in many different directions based on whether rights have been given up in the collective bargaining process.
blexann wrote:
Dec 28th, 2018 12:34 pm

Going from one bank to another alone is not a conflict of interest - although they may have seen it that way or there may be some other factors in play. Sounds like a firing and he would be owed severance
As others have said, this doesn't appear to be a firing, though at a minimum two weeks of termination pay is owed unless this was somehow legitimately a for-cause termination, which would be difficult to believe given the context of happening immediately after a notice of resignation.
MP3_SKY wrote:
Dec 28th, 2018 1:19 pm

Right.

I was asked to leave the office building after I send my resignation too. (Yes at the bank).
He is not fired, he just got send home with pay.
If he didn't get pay, contact the boss or HR. They missed my one week pay as well and I emailed my ex-supervisor and they submit the pay on the next cycle.
Yep. This. It's a mistake that they will need to fix.
raamman wrote:
Dec 28th, 2018 1:59 pm
my understanding you are entitled to the pay for the duration of that notice you provide
Chickinvic wrote:
Dec 29th, 2018 9:15 am

Not necessarily. You can't say "I'm providing 6 months notice" and they would have to pay it. The 2 weeks notice period seems reasonable though.
raamman wrote:
Dec 29th, 2018 12:36 pm
actually, I believe you can- I seem to recall reading such a specific article not too long ago that caught my eye regarding this issue> ( G&M or workopolis ) and that was the the point of that article ie how much pay you entitled to when you give notice.

the better one understands a battlefield the better chance one has of winning the battle
True, but up to a limit.

In "normal" context, someone who gives six months' notice would not be able to use it to save their job for the next six months. If you worked at a bank for five years (non-unionized) and gave two years' notice to your employer on Monday, they could provide you termination notice and effectively reduce your notice period to minimum statutory entitlements at best for them (two weeks term + two weeks severance in the context of the OP) or a negotiated amount based on common law at worst for them. This would also be substantially different for a provincially-regulated workplace (better for the employee).

The kicker is this case really only applies to a small number of workers, since most workplaces are provincially regulated and operate under provincial employment standards rather than the CLC.
Deal Fanatic
Nov 1, 2006
7012 posts
794 upvotes
Toronto
hkazmi wrote:
Dec 28th, 2018 9:23 am
Just curious if that is legit.

Is there any guidelines or law. Seems happened to a family member. Gave two weeks notice, he was asked to leave immediately and did not see his two week pay either, for the moment he hasn't even seen his accrued vacation pay. This was in one of the top 5 banks.
This is pretty normal and is not dismissal. Banks are not perfect by any means but not likely to make rookie mistakes when it comes to employment law.
Deal Fanatic
Nov 1, 2006
7012 posts
794 upvotes
Toronto
raamman wrote:
Dec 29th, 2018 12:36 pm
actually, I believe you can- I seem to recall reading such a specific article not too long ago that caught my eye regarding this issue> ( G&M or workopolis ) and that was the the point of that article ie how much pay you entitled to when you give notice.

the better one understands a battlefield the better chance one has of winning the battle
When an employee hands in long notice like this, an employer does not have to accept it. In some cases they might for, say, operational or training reason. In other cases, they can simply say, no, and perhaps suggest a shorter period, or, they can simply dismiss the employee immediately.

Top