Resignation Letters

[cacian]

what are they for exactly?

if one is to resign say why don't they just do without the hassle of writing it all up as well. It is a bit of a bother non?
So there has got to be another motive.


Any ideas?

[cafolini]

Asking permission from the peers? Otherwise they most likely will burn all bridges and be ostracized.

[YesNo]

Sometimes you are required to give a notice in advance. By having a dated email or letter proving that you gave that notice allows you to actually leave when you expect to leave.

[Lokasenna]

Some people also like to have the opportunity to, as it where, resign in style - the ability to write to your horrible employer and tell him, in eloquent and sophisticated tones, where he can stick his job.

[cacian]

OH I see so
presumably the steps are the following in legal terms:
the employer requests the employee to resign.
The word meaning of to resign means to give up. How does an employer geging someone to resign when it should come from employee himself because for one reason or another he is not coping.

So to recap the employer sacks or asks the employee to resign.
The employee has no choice. He is then ask by law to write a letter of resignation saying that he has accepted resignation or that he has to resign?
The employer receives the letter. He then writes a letter back to accept the resignation.
The issue/question here is

If it was the employer idea to ask someone to resign ie. He asked the employee to resign then how is he to then formalize it by accepting it?
To accept something is usually when someone offers you something. So you either accept or decline.
The letter of resignation does not ask the employer to accept an offer he is given back his request that he asked for. How could he accept it if he it was him that asked for it?

so in real legal term the employer has accepted his own resigantion and not the other way around.

It is a bit like saying an employer offered a job and in receipt he gets a letter of acceptance by the employee to work for him/her. IN this instance and the only time when a letter of acceptance work. Upon request and not in any other way.
A letter of resignation does not work in the same way as a letter of acceptance of employment.
So in legal terms the letter of resignation by default is flawed right?

[papayahed]

oh my. You're making it too complicated. If you choose to quit your job you would write a resignation letter.

If you get fired you don't have to write a resignation letter.

If the company gives you the option to resign you do not have to write a resignation letter.

In any case there needs to be some type of documentation of the last day of work for payroll, insurance, etc... reasons.

[cafolini]

OH I see so
presumably the steps are the following in legal terms:
the employer requests the employee to resign.
The word meaning of to resign means to give up. How does an employer geging someone to resign when it should come from employee himself because for one reason or another he is not coping.

So to recap the employer sacks or asks the employee to resign.
The employee has no choice. He is then ask by law to write a letter of resignation saying that he has accepted resignation or that he has to resign?
The employer receives the letter. He then writes a letter back to accept the resignation.
The issue/question here is

If it was the employer idea to ask someone to resign ie. He asked the employee to resign then how is he to then formalize it by accepting it?
To accept something is usually when someone offers you something. So you either accept or decline.
The letter of resignation does not ask the employer to accept an offer he is given back his request that he asked for. How could he accept it if he it was him that asked for it?

so in real legal term the employer has accepted his own resigantion and not the other way around.

It is a bit like saying an employer offered a job and in receipt he gets a letter of acceptance by the employee to work for him/her. IN this instance and the only time when a letter of acceptance work. Upon request and not in any other way.
A letter of resignation does not work in the same way as a letter of acceptance of employment.
So in legal terms the letter of resignation by default is flawed right?

A letter of resignation is not a legal requirement. The employee can quit as he pleases. But he'll be ostracized by his peers if he burns all bridges by not resigning. That's all there is to it. The rest is neither here nor there.

[cacian]

oh my. You're making it too complicated. If you choose to quit your job you would write a resignation letter.

If you get fired you don't have to write a resignation letter.

If the company gives you the option to resign you do not have to write a resignation letter.

In any case there needs to be some type of documentation of the last day of work for payroll, insurance, etc... reasons.

LOL how about redundacy how does one does that? by claiming benefit off redundancy from an insurance company?


A letter of resignation is not a legal requirement. The employee can quit as he pleases. But he'll be ostracized by his peers if he burns all bridges by not resigning. That's all there is to it. The rest is neither here nor there.

If you do not write a letter of resignation then how do you prove that you have not resigned if there is a legal case and you need to prove it?
If there is no document then there is no proof and no proof no tooth non?

[papayahed]

LOL how about redundacy how does one does that? by claiming benefit off redundancy from an insurance company?

I'm not exactly sure what you are asking.

[cafolini]

If you do not write a letter of resignation then how do you prove that you have not resigned if there is a legal case and you need to prove it?
If there is no document then there is no proof and no proof no tooth non?

If you quit without resigning there is absolute proof that you have not resigned. Quiting and resigning are not synonyms. You remind me of Educating Rita.

[qimissung]

Would it be fun to have a contest with the most outrageous resignation letters? Imaginary, of course. :D

[cacian]

If you quit without resigning there is absolute proof that you have not resigned. Quiting and resigning are not synonyms. You remind me of Educating Rita.

I am afraid I am not rita and you are not being educated.
To quit is to give up something like smoking. The reason one wants to quit is because he or she has been told smoking is bad so quitting is one alternative and for the best? not sure.
To resign is to quit as a result of being told to. They are synonymous on the ground that one is reliant on the other. In other to resign you must quit and in order to quit you must resign.
One is able to quit is not because he has been told and that comes with a cost. Future employment is at risk for obvious reason one would be not proving that you have worked for may not receive references upon quitting by themselves.
Resigning is also quitting but done officially. Now this means that in the next employment the employee may not or may get a job depending on whether the next employer decide to know about why the employer is taking up post at that moment in time. Now the employee may not wish to share his resignation history with his prospective employer for fear of not being accepted.
So to recap neither are helpful or positive for both quitting and resigning have the same resounding negative effect on future employment and therefore the law is to redefine resignation in terms of what it entails and how.
This is what I have demonstrated in my above post this of course to side the employee and not employer.
The employer resignation letter is therefore flawed the reason being that work contract are not to guarantee but to trap you in case you either resign or quit but since one is flawed then contracts are flawed too,

[cacian]

Would it be fun to have a contest with the most outrageous resignation letters? Imaginary, of course. :D

Now you are talking haha.

[papayahed]

To resign is to quit as a result of being told to.


No it's not.

[cacian]

I'm not exactly sure what you are asking.

What I am trying to say is that redundancy is a contract that allows insurance companies to flood light their earnings. This means whilst they are making money somewhere else they are set to loose it all with redundancy. So what comes around goes around which mean insurance companies will no longer guarantee redundancies. This in turn will make them redundant
because there will be no guarantee of a pay out from cash companies. This would means mortgage arrears which also means insurance on earnings is to fade and then banks will collapse. Money carries a price tag that is insurance. Take insurance out and there is no money.
In other redundancies is the payback time for insurance companies it is a trap a kind of an irony because insurance brokers are really thieves. It is money for nothing. And so yes that would be their ultimate punishment for not playing it right.

[cacian]

No it's not.

Ok what is it then?

[papayahed]

What I am trying to say redundancy is a contract that allow companies to flood light their earnings meaning whilst they are making money somewhere else they are set to loose it all with redundancy. SO what comes around goes around which mean insurance companies will no longer guarantee redundancies. This in turn will make them redundant.
which then means no guarantee of a pay out from cash companies. This could means mortgage arrears which also means insurance on earnings is to fade and then banks will collapse. Money carries a price tag that is insurance. Take insurance out and there is no money.

I'm sorry I'm just not following.


Ok what is it then?

A resignation is the formal act of giving up or quitting one's office or position.

[cacian]

I'm sorry I'm just not following.



A resignation is the formal act of giving up or quitting one's office or position.

Sure but why would one resign? There is a formal listing a format of reasons to why resignation occurs hence its legality. To quit a job howver is to walk out of a job without prior information. It is not covered in case of a claim from a company to another. To resign is upon request or knowledge. People know that one has resigned just before resignation because they were either other forced told to or had not other choice but too.
Insurance companies cover the cost of resignation hence its legality. There is no cost coverage for quitting.
Law is about insurance money and resignation is in its clause.

[qimissung]

Your English seems to have radically improved all of a sudden, Cacian.

[papayahed]

Sure but why would one resign? There is a formal listing a format of reasons to why resignation occurs hence its legality. To quit a job howver is to walk out of a job without prior information. It is not covered in case of a claim from a company to another. To resign is upon request or knowledge. People know that one has resigned just before resignation because they were either other forced told to or had not other choice but too.
Insurance companies cover the cost of resignation hence its legality. There is no cost coverage for quitting.
Law is about insurance money and resignation is in its clause.

That is still not true.

To resign is just a more formal and professional form of quitting. Once you resign you give up everything you had been getting from the company.

When one gets fired or laid off the company my provide a severence package.

[Shaman_Raman]

I think I get it. Why not decline to resign if your employer and job is fine, and all the while friends whilst like work with you and quitting is quitting, formally it's a waste of time. But insurance companies behind the scenes won't cover a quitter that's quit for no reason other than quitting for the sake of quitting, so a resignation letter thus requires one to do the work for the doe. But an employee would only write a letter if he felt compelled to do such things by his or her employer, whom one doust not like anyway, that's why they'd just quit.

Yeah, I get it.

Dam..that came out more clear than I intended.

[cacian]

I think I get it. Why not decline to resign if your employer and job is fine, and all the while friends whilst like work with you and quitting is quitting, formally it's a waste of time. But insurance companies behind the scenes won't cover a quitter that's quit for no reason other than quitting for the sake of quitting, so a resignation letter thus requires one to do the work for the doe. But an employee would only write a letter if he felt compelled to do such things by his or her employer, whom one doust not like anyway, that's why they'd just quit.

Yeah, I get it.

Dam..that came out more clear than I intended.

LOL sorry. I am trying to work it out myself. There is a trick about quitting. Anyone can but it gives the company a bad name and the quitter a bad fame.
Insurance companies do not cover quitting because it is not legal in legislature terms. Resigning is but it is flawed as I have explained earlier. The insurance will cover it but the legality behind is flawed. It is what one calls malpratique. or a better word it is a legislating faux-pas a hiccup. The glitch.