Does it really happen in this day and age? Don't companies lockout high value employees immediately as a matter of security and anti-sabotage?
#1: I gave several months notice. At their suggestion I took me my last week off paid in return for being willing to answer emails if problems arose after I left.
#2: I gave 2 weeks notice. I was personally thanked by multiple people for how I wrapped it up, and for a final project that I took on and did in my last 4 hours. They asked me to contract for them some time later, but it didn't work out.
#3: I gave 2 weeks notice. I got contracting work from them after I left, and still have VPN access.
#4: I gave a month notice and had a break before my next job. (A vacation which I spent contracting for #3.) I told them that during that period I would be available on an emergency basis if anything broke. They were happy to take me up on this offer.
In every case I was considered a high value employee. However I had established trust, that was maintained through the process of my leaving, and to the best of my knowledge that trust still exists. (As a matter of corporate policy, my access was usually withdrawn after I left. But not because anyone was concerned about me personally.)
Would not work somewhere that handled employees leaving that way. Sorry Mr. Calacanis!
Employees who are fired or laid off sometimes are locked out, but that's a more confrontational situation where the employer might fear retaliation.
Admitted, this was a small company, at a larger company it might have been different because of rigid policies.
When I was employed myself (long long ago, fortunately) I usually ended up with some contract work from my ex employer to help them tide over until they had found a good replacement, in one case this period extended for 6 months.
edit:
+) To be fair, he actually emailed me last year, almost a decade after it happened that he was terribly sorry about what he did, so in the end even with him I'm still in contact of sorts, and I've forgiven him for what he did, he really seems to have learned his lesson.
I suppose it does depend on the situation - in particular the trust that already exists - and this is probably also related to the size of the company.
This is in England. I wouldn't be surprised at all to hear that things work differently in the US.
The manager is almost always better off by letting the departing employee off immediately to hedge risk. You pay him for the two weeks, and let him sit at home.
What I find most puzzling is why announce the resignation via email? This is almost always best done face to face, or at least via phone. Doing this electronically strikes me as immature.
If someone's resigned rather than been fired or made redundant, they'll already have had plenty of time to do that, won't they?
"What I find most puzzling is why announce the resignation via email? This is almost always best done face to face, or at least via phone. Doing this electronically strikes me as immature."
I agree that handing in your resignation is best done in person, maybe it's an age thing.
This was Ireland, though.
e.g. instead of 'never return, do not attempt to contact us', you could say 'We're sorry to see you go. Monday will be your last day, come in to pick up your belongings and say goodbye and we'll all go out for lunch.'
Just because other companies do it doesn't mean you have to act like a jerk when you do it too.