I was thinking the same thing. OP should find out if it is his old position they are hiring for.

If it's the OP's old job, then clearly he or she is a lazy shirker and the place threw him back, figuring they could get someone decent with the economy being the way it is. At my place of business we get TONS of resumes all the time, so we are always in a position to pick and choose despite the economy. Despite this, I am constantly astonished at the number of loafers we have, who make no effort to disguise their laziness yet should be fully aware of the fact that we could easily replace them with people willing to take the job as entry level without us even advertising. These assholes go through the whole routine of poor reviews and warnings and eventually we dump them for being shitty workers and what do you know, they are stunned and sue us for wrongful termination. Every time. We show the mountains of paperwork documenting the former employee's shittiness to their lawyers and that's the end. One lawyer even snarled at his client, "What the **** is wrong with you? Why didn't you just do your work?" And that, my friends, is the million dollar question.

not always true my state is an at will state meaning they can fire u at will and do not have to have a reason unless u can prove they fired u for race religion etc then your screwed the up side to this is upposed to be that u cant quit at will......

No. 36, if you are a good employee they will keep you. Frankly I think it's good that employers can fire without having to prove the employee was a piece of shit. We waste a lot of time and money proving a worthless former employee was let go because they were worthless. If they had any value to us, we would have kept them. Everyone only thinks in terms of the individual, but why should a company continue to pay some bum who doesn't do the job and spends all day making personal calls and walking around the building chit chatting? It is not unreasonable for a company to expect an employee to be in the building for the amount of time that they are being paid, to do the tasks they are assigned to the best of their ability and to follow basic company policies regarding personal calls and dress code. Instead, we have people on the phone with relatives all over the globe, doing butt-**** nothing instead of their work and dressing like ****** and pimps, then get pissed off when they are warned and warned and warned. I had a woman pitch a fit at me because she repeatedly violated the dress code, was warned repeatedly and then sent home to change and docked a vacation day (all warned about repeatedly) and acted like she was the victim. All that asshole did was demonstrate that she was not promotable because she couldn't follow simple instructions such as 'no flip flops.' But I bet there are a bunch of people on this site who think she is right and we're the assholes for expecting employees to obey orders.

now THAT makes sense.

I was thinking this could be the reasoning for it too.

Absolutely. This happened to a friend of mine. She had been gradually picking up more and more responsibilities as her employer got rid of higher paid employees. When she went to them and said that she was now doing the work of three people and thought she deserved a higher rate of pay, they let her go, claiming they couldn't afford her anymore and might be going out of business. A week later they posted her job on employment websites with a lower rate of pay.

16 - you forgot to take off your sunglasses

cool story bro

your a babe

you're a perv

Wow it is euphoria looking at your puc

29, they only have to change what they call the position, or a few responsibilities of said position to get around that.

I doubt it's illegal. you're laid off, then oh wait we do have money after all!

Your right employers are doing the same around the world