Recently I read that for a new hire they mandate 60 days of notice period to leave with the wording under fullest extent of law. Is it true that you can’t leave without 60 days’ notice? Do they pursue it legally? I also read they have arbitration so in that case how it can be enforced legally?
14 replies (most recent on top)
@dy not if you have sufficient age and years of service.
Unvested RSUs, LMFAO.
Is it worth 2 months of your life to get a measly couple grand in RSU a few years from now? Just negotiate it as a sign-on bonus with your hiring company when you leave.
@OP Two weeks notice is the standard
@cy so what you're saying is that any employee has the ability to find all the answers in Teamworks on their own. Kind of makes you wonder what kind of employees we have if they can't do a simple search on their own.
@cy unvested RSUs are forfeited whether you leave in 60 days or not. But if you leave within 60 days, they are really, no, we are serious forfeited?
In India
@dg that's more than enough to make most people comply
At-will employment cuts both ways. They can claw back RSUs (for positions that still get them), and mark you ineligible for rehire, but that's the worst they can do
you can find this all on teamworks/hr support site. They do make the language full of puffery about the fullest extent of the law... but in an at-will employment situation you can't force someone to work for you - period.
The HRSS site also includes the language about what they can/can't do as recourse. Some of that varies by business unit, and depends on specific external regulators. For everyone - marked ineligible for rehire. if you have RSUs unvested they are forfeited and past year of vested can be clawed back. If you divulge what are deemed proprietary/confidential secrets you can be legally prosecuted... but that extends beyond the notice period anyway.
Absolutely no legal binding. Period.
Notice period requirements vary by officer title and range from 30 days to 90 days.
As has been shared on this site before, failure to give the required notice means you will be marked ineligible for rehire. If that's of no concern to you, ignore it.
For those that have stock awards waiting to vest, WF will cancel all remaining unvested stock and they can clawback all stock that vested in the last 12 months. For some, that is the bigger penalty.
Beyond that, there are no teeth in the requirement as they legally can't hold you captive.
There is a 60 day requirement for some positions. Also the “rumor” about management being forced to give poor performance reviews in order to lay team members off with cause and not pay compensation is not a rumor. I spent far too much time in leadership meetings listening to their game plan and patting themselves on the back as they could save millions not paying compensation. I myself was forced to leave as were many of my peers. I hope Charlie enjoys the extra compensation he has received for the havoc he has caused to thousands of employees.
@af 60 days notice is now required for certain job levels if you want to keep your restricted stock rights.
Is it true that you can’t leave without 60 days’ notice? False. You can leave without any notice.
Do they pursue it legally? No legal action can be taken for violating notice terms.
I also read they have arbitration so in that case how it can be enforced legally? Not applicable for violating notice.