This is a HUGE stress, and also puts you at a disadvantage against your prospect employers.
IMHO, there should be legislation for covering these cases. I.e. when you sponsor a Visa as an employer, it should be mandatory to pay the employee for a minimum of 12-24 months. If you want to lay them off, that's fine, but legally they would still be considered employed and paid in full until that grace period expires.
edit: To be very fair, though, there is an implicit warning in the paperwork and interview for every US work visa for exactly this kind of situation. It's not like they're playing some gotcha game. They don't come right out and say it, but, it's also not exactly hidden between the lines or in small print.
I am NOT 100% sure about this, but to the best of my knowledge, this is not the case in Canada. Work Permits are issues for the duration of the expected work and are usually at least one year long. If you lose your job, you can still remain in Canada until the expiry date of your work permit. You cannot simply start working elsewhere, but if you find a new job, your new employer can start the process of applying for a work permit for you while you are waiting in Canada. So this developer should be good to stay for another 11 to 12 months, if not even longer, while searching for a new job.
I wish there was a way to make this happen but I keep hearing software workers don't need unions because we already make so much money and the better ones have nothing to worry about.
I support "keeping them on the books" for purposes of visa and health insurance, for example, but there are legitimate security reasons to have people cut off quickly when they've been laid off or fired.
I suppose if you had really, really, really good meals provided, it would be reasonable to argue about whether that was a benefit or there for people in the office.
I think its b/c getting fired is bad ofc, but not bad like in the US. I mean we have universal basic income, free healthcare etc. So I just don't think people feel pressured in a way that drives them to exploit access even after a notice, or get mad at the company in the same way. I'm just speculating. Again, there are companies and positions in companies where its a no brainer that access is revoked for security reasons.
Most companies stop having "legitimate security reasons" when the alternative is to pay people for doing nothing. Turns out the fact that actual sabotage and theft of trade secrets is illegal (and often represents a breach of the employment contract, which can incur hefty fines) is a sufficient deterrent for most industries.
People on immigration visas were not given traditional severances. They were simply kept on the books for that period of time without having any access to any resources and/or being expected to do any work.
I’m not entirely sure what happened if they started a job before the period ended. Whether they got the rest of the money as severance or forfeited it but I doubt they really cared.
Thats it. HR knows who is working on visa. Inform them of the situation, give them 3 months, away all their accesses and let them spend the 3 months to look for a new job. Meta makes a bazillion USD pr yeah. Even if they had to pay 1000 works on visa for 3 months it wont make a dent in their profits.
For the employee that just relocated, on the other hand, this makes all the difference in the world.
Corporate greed is disgusting when its put above Human decency like this.