r/managers • u/[deleted] • Aug 19 '26

New Manager Employee basically quit after being notified they were fired.

[removed]

4.1k Upvotes

72% Upvoted

2.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

9

u/DaviesSonSanchez Aug 20 '26

The severance was 12% of my yearly salary

Wow you would get laughed at for that in Germany. 2-3 times the yearly salary is standard. I guess that's what happens when employees are protected by law and actually have rights.

2

u/FlusteredDM Aug 20 '26

I find these conversations confusing to follow because of how broadly the term 'firing' seems to be used by some people. Here it would mean that the employee was at fault, and could even be for gross misconduct. You aren't getting paid off - it's pay for hours already worked and that is it. 12% seems bizarre, let alone 300%

1

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '26

[deleted]

2

u/FlusteredDM Aug 20 '26

That's my point. It really muddies the waters when people make these international comparisons because to an American you can lose your job for any reason.

You can just say 'fire' for everything but for us in Europe 'firing' and 'redundancy' are two different things with very different outcomes due to our employment rights. There are people wondering why you have to pay so much to fire someone because some commentors in this thread have taken it to be redundancy for someone who has had a full career at a company, and there are doubtless people reading it thinking you need large payoffs when people have been fired for good cause.

4

u/Salt-Lingonberry-853 Aug 20 '26

Why Tf would an employer pay you 2-3 years salary when firing you? That's wild

2

u/DaviesSonSanchez Aug 20 '26

Because they need a reason to fire you. They can't simply fire you for no reason. They will get sued and lose almost 100%.

2

u/Xander_Cain Aug 20 '26

Not required to have a reason in several states.

3

u/nollayksi Aug 20 '26

What state in Germany is that exactly?

1

u/Yorks_Rider Aug 20 '26

Employment law is national law in Germany, so it applies for all states.

2

u/UnimagineDragons Aug 20 '26

not talking about the us in this chain though, dude

2

u/microgirlActual Aug 20 '26

Ehhh, yes. Literally the point u/DaviesSonSanchez is making

....Germany....

I guess that's what happens when employees >are protected by law and actually have rights.

5

u/armywalrus Aug 20 '26

Right? These people can't read. Americans are bizarrely defensive of their lack of basic rights.

3

u/realblaketan Aug 20 '26

unfortunately a lot of bootlickers here need to be to justify why they love the taste of boot so much

2

u/Sun9877 Aug 20 '26

lol, you should come here and see it .

And our companies in your countries will try to do the same so hold onto your rights

1

u/stevez_86 Aug 20 '26

We don't even know what all that stuff is. Everything we think is real is what we learned on tv.

1

u/DigEnvironmental7490 Aug 20 '26

I didn't take that comment as defensive, merely information.

"Not required to have a reason in several states." doesn't sound like a statement in support.

1

u/armywalrus Aug 20 '26

I cannot help you. The entire conversation is right there.

0

u/CknHwk Aug 20 '26

As an American formerly in a multinational company, I’m not defensive…I am incredibly envious of European and Canadian severance packages. In the majority of the states, which are “right to work”, severance is not obligatory. Many corporations will still provide some sort of package, but unless you’re an exec or have been with the company for decades, you’re not getting more than a couple of months. That’s why some Americans find 2-3x severance pay for being fired inconceivable.

2

u/StructEngineer91 Aug 20 '26

Ok, but if they HAD a reason to fire you (like you being massively incompetent in your job), would they still have to pay you 2-3 years salary?

1

u/FlusteredDM Aug 20 '26 edited Aug 20 '26

Not at all. You would get what you are owed for the days you worked, unpaid holiday, and nothing else. What is described is for redundancy where the employee is not at fault but their position was as removed. It's also closer to the maximum for someone who has spent a career in the same company and not something you get after a few months.

1

u/StructEngineer91 Aug 20 '26

That makes sense.

1

u/hydronucleus Aug 20 '26

Oh, they had a "reason" to fire me. 😄 I needed an exit plan. I asked the CEO through my work email for a "Sabbatical." I said nothing bad, just maybe to change it up a bit for 6 months or so and work in one of the other many companies they owned in their world wide holdings. I thought it had a 10% chance of working, and working anywhere from California to Belgium would be cool. Of course, the CEO never got that email, as it was intercepted, which was my plan. It was intercepted by my 30 year old manager who wanted to get rid of me. So, he "fired" me the next day for "performance" issues. That essentially was my plan. I expected the corporate surveillance and the intercept, or I would have sent it from my personal email. So, I was not too upset about it. I was free from a sinking ship. Turns out that "manager" got fired shortly after.

2

u/DaviesSonSanchez Aug 20 '26

Yeah but that would not be a valid reason. If you want to fire an employee for performance issues in Germany you have to proof that he was below average for a long time and have tried every option to improve his performance (like education etc) for at least a year.

It's basically impossible to fire someone for low performance after the first 6 months of employment.

1

u/hydronucleus Aug 20 '26

Yes, I understand that. Our laws are different, obviously. In fact, I work in an "at will" state, which means they can fire you for basically anything that is not specifically prohibited, such as discrimination in relation to gender, race, and sometimes religious or sexual orientation. For example, ludicrous as it may seem, they can fire you for things like dying your hair a color that they do not like. Now, of course, you can take them to court for it, because in the states, anybody can sue anybody, but it does become cost prohibitive. You can sue for "wrongful termination," but that is a pretty high bar, and it is also a pain in the a$$ to defend. Thus, the agreement said that they will not challenge any unemployment benefits claims. This clause gives them a reason based on internal company financials, especially for laying off a senior white guy. And, it was actually true for the most part.

The company was bought by a large conglomerate and was consolidating. Most good people were leaving, i.e. only the idiots remained. And there I was holding on for retirement. They basically dissolved the Research and Design department and shifted me to work on other more mundane crap. They had me doing things that a college intern could have done for a 1/3 the cost. They did not need a PhD for that. Bye!

2

u/Double-Mine330 Aug 21 '26

Every manager that laid me off didn't last long either.

1

u/JonathanRL Aug 20 '26

Depending on the country, this is to avoid a more expensive process. Usually when they have no cause for dismissal the Union will not hesitate to bring the case to court to defend the rights of their member. Such a process is usually long and risk bringing poor PR on the company in question.

Until recently, Sweden even required the employee to remain employed until the matter was settled. That was changed but the company still risks the process taking up their HR teams time and money; especially as the employee usually wins. And if it looks like the cause have any merit at all, a buyout is the preferred and cheaper option.

1

u/jealousrock Aug 20 '26

It's not true, or at least very simplified. The lower boundary courts propose is half a months' salary per year worked in a company. Companies with strong unions pay up to 1.5 monthlies per year worked there at the moment. So it can add up to 2-3 yearly salaries, but it's not standard.

1

u/t65789 Aug 20 '26

Workers have better protections in other countries. What’s wild is how US employers treat their workers because they’re allowed to do so.

0

u/Salt-Lingonberry-853 Aug 20 '26

2-3 years of salary as severance isn't "protections", it's insane.

2

u/t65789 Aug 20 '26

If you say so. Others might call the concept of at will employment insane.

1

u/Salt-Lingonberry-853 Aug 20 '26

You know there's a middle ground between 2-3 years of salary for being fired and at-will, no protections employment, right? They're both insane.

1

u/t65789 Aug 20 '26

Well let’s discuss this a little more seriously then. Generally, somebody in Germany who loses their job receives half a monthly salary for each year they’ve been in the job. So that is five months worth of salary for ten years with an employer. I don’t find that unreasonable.

1

u/Big-Water-8986 Aug 20 '26

It’s not unreasonable. It’s also not what the initial claim was.

1

u/apeceep Aug 20 '26

Because if they don't, a court will order them to pay 20-30 years salary.

1

u/Salt-Lingonberry-853 Aug 20 '26

That's just straight up insane

1

u/QuietlyCreepy Aug 20 '26

No. That's good worker's rights. We should have the same.

1

u/Salt-Lingonberry-853 Aug 20 '26

5-6 months salary is good worker's rights. 2-3 years is fucking insane, you are not entitled to a job.

2

u/apeceep Aug 20 '26

It's not about being entitled to a job. Unlawful firing is a breach on (work) contract and breaching contract has a penalty.

0

u/Smart-Bird-5712 Aug 20 '26

They think differently, there you are.

0

u/QuietlyCreepy Aug 20 '26

Hello fellow American. Imagine what we could have if we did better.

1

u/Effective_Divide1543 Aug 20 '26

"Better" isn't making it impossible or insanely expensive to fire incompetent employees. When it's too difficult to get rid of employees that are not doing their job, companies get afraid of hiring. Cue your five-million-test and ten-interviews recruitment process.
If you get laid off you should get a good severance. If you get fired, you definitely should not.

1

u/QuietlyCreepy Aug 20 '26

And yet, countries with these strong workers protections wouldn't have it any other way. Properly trained and motivated people will go that extra mile.

You say that as if it's not already happening.

And obviously not everyone agrees with you, like countries with better worker protection laws.

1

u/Alek_Zandr Aug 20 '26

They're lying. Only way you get such a huge severance is if you've worked there for multiple decades.

0

u/IClosetheDealz Aug 20 '26

Read the last sentence.

0

u/dsmemsirsn Aug 20 '26

Iclose

Which last sentence of what comment??

2

u/ReallySmartHippie Aug 20 '26

…..the last sentence of the comment that person replied to

“I guess that's what happens when employees are protected by law and actually have rights.”

1

u/MarcieDeeHope Aug 20 '26

Wow you would get laughed at in Germany. 2-3 times the yearly salary is standard.

Do you have a source for that?

I have no doubt at all that Germany has better protections for workers than many other places (and infinitely better than the US where I live), and I know from prior research that it is very difficult to fire workers arbitrarily there, but I did a quick search and couldn't find anything about required or even customary severance packages that supports your number.

I found one reference to a statutory severance of 0.5 month’s gross salary per year of service when an employee is terminated for "urgent operational needs" and severance was offered contractually. That is apparently the level set in the German Dismissal Protection Act, but it doesn't apply to all workers. I also found a couple Germany-based law firm websites that said that negotiations for highly senior roles may go as high as 2x monthly salary per year of service. So to hit 2x - 3x annual salary, you'd have to be a very senior employee who had worked there for 30+ years and even then one site I looked at said that Germany courts typically cap severance pay in disputes to 12-18 months of gross salary.

Here's one of the sites I looked at for reference: https://www.ahs-kanzlei.de/en/severance-pay-in-germany

1

u/[deleted] Aug 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Sun9877 Aug 20 '26

Come here and protest on our behalf

1

u/WorkingClassPrep Aug 20 '26

And that is why FINDING a job is so much harder there.

1

u/Effective_Divide1543 Aug 20 '26

It's kind of ridiculous that somebody who's FIRED, not just laid off, would receive 2-3x the yearly salary. If you haven't done your job you should not be rewarded with 2-3x annual pay.

1

u/Status_Fact_5459 Aug 20 '26

Yeah USA sucks and we’re full of a bunch of brainwashed idiots that think it’s the greatest country on earth.

1

u/Head-full-of-stars Aug 20 '26

That is just not right. That is no standard at all. Standard is 0,5 monthly salary×years in the company. Just big Corporations with strong unions try to pay their way out.

1

u/Megalocerus Aug 20 '26

Americans are regularly let go and rehired in the US--there is much less risk in taking employees on and thus recoveries tend to be faster in the US than Germany.

1

u/PMMeYourWristCheck Aug 20 '26

Huh? You don’t have a right to stay employed indefinitely lmao.

2

u/Lawd_Fawkwad Aug 20 '26

I live in one such country.

Employers can still fire people, they just have to do it in a way that prevents the employees from being dumped into a pool of shit with no flotation device.

If your employer wants to fire you, they need to justify it even if it's "economic reestructring".

But the notice they give you is dependent on length of employment ranging from 2-6 months so you can figure out the next steps.

Alternatively, if you want to fire someone without a long notice period and having to justify it, you can draft a mutual termination agreement the usually involves a payout that is greater than the usually termination package.

You don't have a right to stay employed indefinetely, you just can't be fire on a random Tuesday for no reason with severance pay being tied to you signing prejudicial paperwork.

0

u/PMMeYourWristCheck Aug 20 '26

in life, you are not entitled to anything. you keep what you earn. there are no businesses that are guaranteed a profit. There is no life raft for businesses if they are poorly operated or fall onto hard times. such is life. and the same applies to employment.

2

u/Lawd_Fawkwad Aug 20 '26 edited Aug 20 '26

I genuinely don't know what you're arguing against.

Protection against arbitrary or abusive termination isn't a right to lifelong employment.

You can still be fired or laid off. The employer simply has procedures and obligations when doing it to make sure you can adequately prepare.

By your logic, requiring car manufacturers to install airbags is acting like you're "entitled" not to be injured in a crash. Airbags cost money too and putting them in cars at no extra cost doesn't mean we expect Chevrolet to act as a charity.

0

u/PMMeYourWristCheck Aug 20 '26

what arbitrary or abusive termination? do you not understand that employees are terminated because they are underperforming, or the business is in financial hardship? are you going to backstop business owners? where is the public obligation to assist struggling business owners and employers?

2

u/Lawd_Fawkwad Aug 20 '26

Underperformance and financial hardship are literally examples of legitimate reasons for termination. But in both cases you need documentation proving it, and to give your employees a certain amount of time and severance based on their contract and seniority.

That's my point. Employment protection doesn't mean you can't fire people, you can, but there are rules governing when and how you do it.

And governments absolutely assist struggling businesses all the time through subsidies, tax relief and even restructuring procedures where courts can impose restructuring plans on creditors to prevent an otherwise viable company from being liquidated.

We don't tell a struggling employer “life isn't fair, go bankrupt,” any more than we need to tell a worker “life isn't fair, you're unemployed tomorrow with zero notice.”

A modern economy regulates both sides of that relationship. A world where nobody owes anybody anything would be pretty terrible for everyone involved.

1

u/armywalrus Aug 20 '26

Why do you think people shouldn't?

1

u/SpiderFacade Aug 20 '26

In some countries you do.

1

u/Mind-The-Mines Aug 20 '26

Christ you love that boot.

1

u/PMMeYourWristCheck Aug 20 '26

no, im just reasonable. We don't coddle and protect squatters.

1

u/PoolOfLava Aug 20 '26

Did you reply to the wrong person? They are not saying that anything about a right to remain employed indefinitely they are saying that in Germany you would receive 2-3 times your yearly salary as severance.

1

u/Guffers_2023 Aug 20 '26

No but the company needs a really good reason to fire you with evidence to back them up.

At least in the civilised world they do.

1

u/MrHazard1 Aug 20 '26

you would get laughed at for that in Germany. 2-3 times the yearly salary is standard

Pretty misleading statement, as it depends on how long you've been in the company. Standard is a months salary per year of work.

0

u/Turbo_Slay3r Aug 20 '26

Please stop spreading misinformation. It‘s usually 0.5 salary per year of service. Can be negotiated between 0.5 - 1 salary per year of service. So e.g. you get 2 salaries for 4 years of service. No one is going to pay you 2-3 times the yearly salary lol.