Hello, I have been working for a year which I think allows me to be on the dole if I lose my job.

I am working on a temporary contract: a fixed position should be offered to me by the end of this contract.
However what if I am not happy with the contract terms and decide not to renew my contract ? Would I be allowed to receive unemployment aids ?
(or does one needs to get fired to receive them ?)

Also, as an ex student, my b permit runs only for a few months so to be safe, I need to renew my permit for a 5 year one (is that possible without having to wait until the expiration of the current one ? Because I wont get one if im unemployed I guess)

Thank you

By not agreeing the new contract you are denying yourself employment and will be liable to possibly as much as a 90 work day penalty in addition to any waiting days you have anyway.

You best course of action would be to accept the contract and look for another job.

90 days is of course over 4 months as there are 21.6 work days a month!, that is in addition to upto the first 25 days not being paid if you are a high earner.

The Law is clear, you have to do ANY paid work that you are offered if your claiming unemployment benefits, it's insurance against not having work. If you turn down work you cant expect to be paid out on insurance.

And what if I dont have any offer ? Do I have to be laid off from a fixed position ?

No. That would be an idiotic law, wouldn't it?

But you need to show that you tried to find employment from the moment you knew that you will be unemployed. So you cannot let your contract run out without applying for jobs in the last months of your contract... why don't you search the forum a bit, all the info is available and repeated over and over again.

When you register for unemployment they want all your documentation including previous contract. They may well (normally do) contact your previous employer for information, if they find out that your contract expired but that you turned doen a fixed contract - even if the terms are not the same - you may well find yourself without money for quite a while. If your contract expires and nothing is offered then you are ok, but as a previous poster has said you must apply for jobs at least 2 months before your contract expires in order to escape punishment.

A lot of good comments already, and all correct.
Of course the most important rule to consider, is that to be considered for un-employment benefits, you need to have worked for 12 months in the last 24 months.

I am not sure all comments are correct. Sorry to nitpick.

You can turn down an unfavourable contract or job (that means quit) and you can still get unemployment benefits after a short "penalty" period.
As far as I know (from an example in my village swiss friend's case, Kanton ZH), he had to forgo 1 month or 2 month's salary. Not 90 days.
I am inclined to think it is 1 month and not 2 months.

I also think they are not allowed to contact your previous employer without your consent. They are pretty strict about this, because it is privacy.

However, for the cases of auslanders (foreigners), there could be a total different interpretation of the above.

Just as I told the OP, the same to you: the info has been posted several dozen times:
- RAV consultants have a certain amount of freedom to decide exactly how many days of penalty you get.
- the rules got much tighter in the last years and the consultants apparently are supposed to push the mentioned freedom a bit more, so the question is how much your friend would get in 2012, not say 2009...
- I hit the Rav for exactly one month between two contracts before. I can honestly not say that they treated me any different as a foreigner and I must say that I have witnessed some consultants with the "client" next to me really trying to walk the extra mile explaining all the details to somebody who was pretty obviously not only bad at German but rather thick as well.

In short: I think it is pretty unfair to blame the RAV to discriminate against foreigners if you do not have the slightest experience of proof to back that claim up.

You are the same troll you were five years ago: no substance but a lot of opinion. Time to ignore you again.

My friend quit his job in Jan 2012. He got 1 month penalty and now gets 80% of his last paid salary. Kanton Zurich.
FACTS.

Not 90days as mentioned here. Not sure if it was you, I am not even talking about names or you.
Don't worry, ignore me. I am not asking for fans. Troll? It slices both ways.

It is normally, as stated above, a one month penalty then 80% of your salary if you hand in your resignation.

However, what kind of residence permit to you have? If its a C, its OK, but a B is connected to your employment, and you would lose it if you didnt have any, I think.

FACT - the punishment is a maximum of 90 work days, just because somebody got less doesn't change this. I know an auslander who got 7 punishment days and I know a Swiss guy who got 40.

They do have the right to contact your employer to make sure you are not making a fraudulent claim. Yes you can turn down work, but you will be punished, only the degree differs.

Agreed, my wife (Swiss, always worked since she left school) went to the RAV to get help finding a 40% position after having a baby and was treated like a piece of crap by the RAV. Her brother was fired for no real reason after 16 years with the same company and was also treated like crap.

Many of you have been helpful with facts.
That is a good thing.

Some of us are not working in this department, and we draw our opinions from facts/stories/half-truths given to us by our friends and surrounding people. We give them as "I think, could be, ..." such words means not 100% sure.

If we are not allowed to post our knowledge, because we are not experts, then we better be warned to keep quiet at all times.
And all the "good" posters must be certified true fact givers, etc.

Many of us are just trying to help the OP out with what we know.
Being called a troll, is not very nice nor friendly.
I hope this is clearer to all of us here. And we have no need to begin a flamewar because some of the facts do not tally, but they actually add up.


PS: I have experienced my fair share of foreigner discrimination, but I am unable /not allowed to post them here, because they incite swiss-hatred. So...I cannot, and will not begin.

Passing on half-truths and stories doesn't help the OP if they are based on incorrect facts. Facts in this case that could cost the OP a lot of money.

That is totally correct and so right.
Therefore many of us, post examples which we have heard or experienced.

Some of us who know better, will quote statures and documents.

Ridiculing others in a post is just not right. So is calling names.


The OP needs to gather all he can get here, and then go ask the person who will judge him for the penalty period. That would be the best thing for him to do.

I am getting my coat, leaving this thread before it burns me further.
Thank you gentlemen....

Incorrect conclusions from half-remembered stories do not qualify as an "opinion", much less as useful information. Too many irrelevant data points makes an analysis impossible, and you should expect that people will respond similarly to such posts in the future.

I don't know what history there is between you all, but from my perspective, Mr HAT is being treated unreasonably here, and is not guilty of the charges based on the evidence put before us.

Case dismissed.

Many of his posts are just meta-comments on the forum itself and its content. Hence the accusation of being a troll.

I was only going on the answers given in this discussion. Not seen any other posts but I thought he was being pretty helpful here before the ambush.