ethics of giving 2 weeks notice?

[Marlow]

I'm in a job where I'm working on many long-term projects simultaneously. I'm almost solely responsible for all of them. I'm leaving my job soon and I'd like to know if in your opinion you think it's Ok to only give 2 weeks notice. I've always given more elsewhere, but it would help me a lot if I only gave 2 weeks here.

I've been in the job for 2 and 1/2 years.

Thanks,

Marlow

[HopeydaFish]

If your employers have been fair to you while you were employed by them and you can possibly give them more notice than just the two weeks, you should give them more notice.

Ultimately, you need to do what's best for you. However, keep in mind that if you only give them 2 weeks notice and this hurts their business as a result, you probably won't be able to use them as a reference later on. This might hurt your future prospects. In this case, giving them more than 2 weeks notice would be in *your* best interests as well.

[Hal 2000]

2 weeks OFFICIAL notice is the standard, but what I'd do is if you have a certain supervisor that you respect, drop a hint to them that you're giving notice soon.

[M2d]

can you give the two weeks and offer to come back as a consultant to help transition your projects? a little back breaking, but it's win-win.

[Indiana]

Oh dude, I have a friend going through this same thing right now. First of all, it totally depends on whether or not you have told your boss that you are swamped with work. Nothing wrong with 2 weeks notice, just dont spring your quitting on your boss without letting them know that you are unhappy far in advance of writing the resignation letter. Simply put, they deserve a chance to try and mediate the situation and it looks bad on them when you quit abruptly. Talk to your boss about this and if it cannot be made better, then give ur 2 wks notice.

Just my 2 cents, Indy

[[censored]]

sure it is ethical and I mean if it is just a job who cares as long as your ethical.

However if you have a personal relationship with your boss of coworkers that you would like to maintain then I for one would try and do whatever I could to make it as easy on them. This may require giving a more than 2 week advance notice.

[djoyce003]

I think this is really company dependent. I worked for a company that would lay people off and not even give them 2 weeks severance....they would call em in, fire em, and make em box up their crap and walk em out...they got paid for that day only...no 2 weeks. I wouldn't feel the least bit guilty about giving a company like that 0 weeks notice.

However, if you work for a company that tends to treat people fairly and all that, I would give them at least 2 weeks...possibly more. Remember, 2 weeks is all you owe them because it is likely all you would get. As long as you give them 2 weeks they can't really hold a grudge. Other important considerations...if you are going to work for a competitor, your company might escort you out the day you give your notice so I wouldn't do it more than 2 weeks in advance or else you could be out of work for longer than you were thinking, etc. At my company, if you go to work for a competitor, they try to talk you out of it, then if they can't, they escort you out that very day, so that is something to consider.

[CardSharpCook]

I have a different perspective coming from the restaurant industry.

First, you can be fired on a whim. That is, you come into work on Friday, and just after you finish cleaning up, the manager comes over and says, "hey buddy, don't come back tomorrow." So if you can be fired on a whim, why not quit on a whim? In fact, I've never known of an instance in which someone was told they were being replaced and then worked another minute at any restaurant I've ever worked at. (except for the girl who just didn't "get it" that she was fired. She came back the next day after being thrown out of the kitchen the night before. Oh, drama....)

Second, your employers hate thinking about an impending turnover. If they know you are leaving in a month, they'll start looking tomorrow. Waiting tables once, I gave the owner 4 weeks notice. Two weeks later I hire my own replacement and then her first day, I get a phone call from the owner saying, "I've re-written the schedule, and you're not on it." Thanks, buddy, I can afford to be without work for these two weeks... I don't have any moving expenses or anything.

Third, it creates disharmony for your remaining time. Everyone knows you're about to leave, the boss is thinking about it, new people are coming in to audition for the job. Just bad things, man.

In conclusion, give them two weeks notice. No more, no less.

CSC

[HopeydaFish]

This is really industry-dependant. If you're working a low skill, low paying job, two weeks notice is all you really need to give. The company can find someone else to replace you in the two weeks. These service industry jobs are also more likely to screw you over when you're kind enough to give them notice.

If you're working in a job that requires specialized skills (which I believe is the case with the OP), 2 weeks might not be long enough to find a suitable replacement. With these jobs, if you are able to give more than 2 weeks' notice, it is preferable. These companies are also less likely to play games with you than the service industry jobs are.

[Marlow]

Yep, you need a master's degree to do what I do. I like my boss and other coworkers, but I can't wait to get the hell outta here.

Seems like I should do more than 2 weeks if I can, tho.

As always, 2+2 pulls through with good advice.

*sigh*

Marlow