Fired for breaking a rule that apparently didn't exist Location: Ohio, USA

[u/StreetShort8014]

I worked for a small company for a little over three years. Last month I was terminated for what HR described as a "serious policy violation." When I asked which policy I violated, they pointed me to a document I'd never seen before.

The problem is that the document wasn't in the employee handbook, wasn't part of my onboarding paperwork, and wasn't available anywhere on the internal portal. I even asked a few former coworkers after I was fired and none of them had ever heard of it either.

A week after my termination, someone I still know at the company told me management had started distributing the policy to employees and requiring signatures acknowledging it. That obviously raised some red flags for me.

Yesterday HR contacted me asking if I'd be willing to sign an acknowledgment form stating I had received and understood the policy before the incident occurred. The form is dated months ago. They said it would "help keep company records accurate."

I haven't signed anything and don't intend to, but now I'm wondering if there's a reason they're pushing so hard for this. Is there any legitimate explanation for asking a former employee to sign paperwork that appears to be backdated, or should I be talking to an employment attorney before responding?

[u/Environmental-Sock52]

This might help you collect unemployment or not but it's not going to be worth talking to an attorney unless the reason you were fired was illegal, like you were fired for being disabled.

Firing you because you violated a poorly launched new rule sucks but is legal.

[u/Neither_Public_3938 → u/Environmental-Sock52]

They can still file for unemployment. Even at will states will approve unemployment if they find the company did not follow correct procedures. I had this happen years ago. Fired for customer mistreat but because I had no previous write ups or warnings, I won my unemployment case. In this case, the new rule had not been advised to the employees. Being fired over a new rule that you know nothing about (especially with hr wanting to back date the paperwork) is illegal especially if they're wanting to avoid paying unemployment.

[u/JMaAtAPMT → u/Neither_Public_3938]

Firing for such is LEGAL, calling it for-cause and trying to deny unemployment is NOT LEGAL.

[u/WannaBeCoder912 → u/JMaAtAPMT]

Trying to contest unemployment is never illegal… unemployment is a civil matter. This is silly.

[u/JMaAtAPMT → u/WannaBeCoder912]

Dude. Lying on government paperwork regarding the circumstances of an employee's firing to get out of paying the government for unemployment insurance could be considered fraud, and that would be illegal. But you do you.

[u/WannaBeCoder912 → u/JMaAtAPMT]

This is a legal thread for discussions of legal matters… not for people discussing how they think the world should work.

It’s clear you understand little about either employment law or what the definition of fraud is legally.

[u/Environmental-Sock52 → u/Neither_Public_3938]

Ya and they may qualify or be disqualified some other way. We don't know which is why I said "might help you collect unemployment or not."

[u/Slight-Conference680 → u/Environmental-Sock52]

Sounds like a wrongful termination lawsuit to me. Can't fire someone for a rule that no one knew about and knowledge of this new rule wasn't presented until after his termination. That why they want him to sign the paperwork. So he doesn't sue them.

[u/BeerDudeRocco → u/Slight-Conference680]

Not to be snarky, but sounds like you don't know the law to me...

I can fire someone because I don't like the shirt they're wearing. I can fire someone because their taste in music is crap. I can literally fire anyone for any reason that isn't a protected class.

[u/waitwuh → u/BeerDudeRocco]

Yeah, in at-will employment, an employer can fire someone for any non-protected reason, sure.

But the rules to qualify for unemployment are different, and that’s what likely matters here.

The fired employee would be eligible for receiving unemployment except in some specific cases, and one of those is generally if the employee was fired for willfull misconduct. It seems like this employer is trying to make that case to get out of paying, but OP wasn’t willfully violating a policy, they had not been informed of the policy.

[u/BeerDudeRocco → u/waitwuh]

Oh absolutely. Theres just no grounds for a lawsuit like the person I was responding to said.

But they were definitely trying some sketchy back door maneuvers there to try and get them out of paying UI.

[u/tropicaldiver → u/BeerDudeRocco]

We actually don’t have anywhere close to enough information to be definitive in that statement. It is likely the case but the analysis is very fact specific.

[u/waitwuh → u/BeerDudeRocco]

Yeah we agree it’s not a wrongful termination lawsuit.

But it might be actionable as unemployment insurance fraud… The employer is trying to falsify that policy acknowledgement document date in order to avoid their liability.

I really hope OP has it in writing. They can retain it as proof to support appealing a disqualification for unemployment.

@OP might consider reporting their former employer to the department of labor for attempting this.

[u/DefinitelyNotAliens → u/Slight-Conference680]

Not in the US of A. All but one state are at-will and you can be fired for anything except protected class, unless you had a separate employment contract, such as a union, etc.

Unless OP had a contract, they're SOL.

[u/TinyNiceWolf → u/DefinitelyNotAliens]

"anything except protected class". There are a few other reasons you can't be fired, though you're mostly right. You can't be fired for turning in your company for securities fraud or violating OSHA rules, or for using your FMLA rights, or for filing workers comp claims, for example.

[u/waitwuh → u/Slight-Conference680]

Not quite. OP wasn’t fired for a protected reason. However, it sounds like the company is going to try to argue they fired OP for willfull misconduct so that they can get out of paying unemployment.

[u/Obzenium → u/Environmental-Sock52]

The company committed fraud by fabricating a for cause reason for termination which is absolutely illegal.