Severance pay scams can continute

[windeguy]

I guess giving the employee that barely makes a livable salary a fair shake if he is canned is not agreeable to some here................

No. Not this at all. It has nothing to do with what you mention.

What happens is someone takes a job, they work for several months and do the job. Then they start to screw off.
At that point the employer decides to find a replacement and the failing employee is let go.

That screw off of an employee then goes to the Minstery of Labor, gets a document from them where the employers has to pay a severance package in order to release them from a job at which they were not performing. The amount is based upon how long they were working, which is frequently just long enogh to be eligible to collect the severance. The employer will face court action if they don't pay up. The employee screwed off deliberately to get a severance payment.

If you never had employees you would not be aware of this scam. If you ever had employees, you almost certainly have had this happen. The government is aware of this, was going to change the policy, but ended up keeping it instead. So employers will continue to be screwed in this manner.

I see that othes with employees have already had this happen and it will continue. It is very bad for businesses.

 

[SKY]

No. Not this at all. It has nothing to do with what you mention.

What happens is someone takes a job, they work for several months and do the job. Then they start to screw off.
At that point the employer decides to find a replacement and the failing employee is let go.

That screw off of an employee then goes to the Minstery of Labor, gets a document from them where the employers has to pay a severance package in order to release them from a job at which they were not performing. The amount is based upon how long they were working, which is frequently just long enogh to be eligible to collect the severance. The employer will face court action if they don't pay up. The employee screwed off deliberately to get a severance payment.

If you never had employees you would not be aware of this scam. If you ever had employees, you almost certainly have had this happen. The government is aware of this, was going to change the policy, but ended up keeping it instead. So employers will continue to be screwed in this manner.

I see that othes with employees have already had this happen and it will continue. It is very bad for businesses.

I know full well about all this. You are talking about Peanuts...............Pay and move on...........

 

[windeguy]

I know full well about all this. You are talking about Peanuts...............Pay and move on...........

We did move on. We no longer hire people for more than a short time. Screw this policy.

It is the principal for us. For larger businesses, this policy causes them harm.

You like telling people what to do, You like being screwed by these useless employees, by all means carry on.

 

[SKY]

We did move on. We no longer hire people for more than a short time. Screw this policy.

It is the principal for us. For larger businesses, this policy causes them harm.

You like telling people what to do, You like being screwed by these useless employees, by all means carry on.

The difference is I have 90 days to get rid of a useless employee...............

 

[windeguy]

The difference is I have 90 days to get rid of a useless employee...............

Well, then you missed the point of what we and others have seen. The employee does a good job for over 90 days , then screws off, gets fired and collects severance. That is what happens all too frequently and the DR government could have stopped the scam, but did not. We gave up hiring full time people years ago. I know restaurants that fire much of their help every 90 days.

 

[NanSanPedro]

Well, then you missed the point of what we and others have seen. The employee does a good job for over 90 days , then screws off, gets fired and collects severance. That is what happens all too frequently and the DR government could have stopped the scam, but did not. We gave up hiring full time people years ago. I know restaurants that fire much of their help every 90 days.

I'm curioius about background checks employers do. Couldn't they ID a potential employee who works for 6 or 8 months but no more? Or, are the "resumes" so sketchy that it's impossible to verify past employment? Is the database for employees open to potential employers?

 

[windeguy]

I'm curioius about background checks employers do. Couldn't they ID a potential employee who works for 6 or 8 months but no more? Or, are the "resumes" so sketchy that it's impossible to verify past employment? Is the database for employees open to potential employers?

Database for employees in the DR? You think there might be one?

I suppose there are some ways employers can check references for severance scammers, but I cannot imagine there is a database anywhere they can check.

 

[ramesses]

What is the original reason for this policy?

 

[windeguy]

What is the original reason for this policy?

To protect the employee.

 

[ramesses]

To protect the employee.

So, it was needed? What has changed to say it is no longer needed?

 

[windeguy]

So, it was needed? What has changed to say it is no longer needed?

The empolyees constantly scam the system as described in full in my post above. That is why they were going to get rid of it, but didn't.

 

[ramesses]

The empolyees constantly scam the system as described in full in my post above. That is why they were going to get rid of it, but didn't.

But obviously there needs to be some kind of replacement. What would that be? The solution should not be to go back to a system where the employee has no protections. Or, is that already in place? I am asking because I don't know.

 

[drstock]

It is not, but if you would have any employees here you would know why the common Situation is very bad.
After they work for you for several years, they want their liquidation more than the Devil needs fresh Souls, they want to get fired. They will do such a lousy job and will do so much damage that you will fire them in the end.

That's a hell of a generalisation. Some employees may act as you say but I have had employees who have worked well for me here for years without trying to get fired. I have been asked for liquidation pay during their employment, if they need cash, and this basically means terminating their employment and then re-hiring them. I don't mind that as it means the final liquidation bill is lower. But to say all of "them" act in a certain way when people are all so different doesn't make much sense to me.

 

[keepcoming]

Agree, my FIL (his family) has a large business. They have had the same employees for years, with a new hire here and there, people retiring, etc. There are always going to be those who try and take advantage of the system, but you can't say every employee is this way.

 

[JD Jones]

Agree, my FIL (his family) has a large business. They have had the same employees for years, with a new hire here and there, people retiring, etc. There are always going to be those who try and take advantage of the system, but you can't say every employee is this way.

Same. That why we made the decision to facilitate the removal of the ones who didn't want to be there.

It worked out really well.

 

[keepcoming]

We did move on. We no longer hire people for more than a short time. Screw this policy.

It is the principal for us. For larger businesses, this policy causes them harm.

You like telling people what to do, You like being screwed by these useless employees, by all means carry on.

By hiring someone for a short time to get around the policy, IMO that would make employees want to try and take advantage of the system even more. If you just generalize then maybe you are losing out on a good/faithful employee. Restaurants that fire their employees every 90 days? I am not sure about that. I have been to many, many restaurants over the years, and I have seen the same employees over and over. By doing this (firing every 90 days) then the employer is just as bad as the employee trying to scam the system.

 

[SKY]

By hiring someone for a short time to get around the policy, IMO that would make employees want to try and take advantage of the system even more. If you just generalize then maybe you are losing out on a good/faithful employee.

Even worse. Word gets out the only ones that will work for you are the bottom of the barrel or ones with bad intentions...............

 

[cavok]

Well, then you missed the point of what we and others have seen. The employee does a good job for over 90 days , then screws off, gets fired and collects severance. That is what happens all too frequently and the DR government could have stopped the scam, but did not. We gave up hiring full time people years ago. I know restaurants that fire much of their help every 90 days.

The rule mentioned was one month liquidation pay pay for every year employed. How much do they get for, say, 6 months?

 

[AlterEgo]

The rule mentioned was one month liquidation pay pay for every year employed. How much do they get for, say, 6 months?

There’s an online calculator the government provides. I’m sure someone here has the link.

 

[cavok]

That's a hell of a generalisation. Some employees may act as you say but I have had employees who have worked well for me here for years without trying to get fired. I have been asked for liquidation pay during their employment, if they need cash, and this basically means terminating their employment and then re-hiring them. I don't mind that as it means the final liquidation bill is lower. But to say all of "them" act in a certain way when people are all so different doesn't make much sense to me.

At our condo, we look at liquidation as part of their pay package, just like employers in the US treat treat an employee's 401k contribution. Also. if an employee needs money, we give them a loan which is a lien against their liquidation if not paid back.