Georgia Separation Notice: Fill & Download for Free

All states except Montana are at-will states. Many states have exceptions, such as public sector jobs or union contracts or discrimination or illegal activity. Other states - Florida, Alabama, Louisiana, Georgia, Nebraska, Maine, New York, and Rhode Island - don’t have any exceptions.An employer in an at-will state can dismiss you for any reason or no reason, with or without the customary notice period.It also means you can quit for any reason or no reason, with or without the customary notice period.So, unless you work in Montana then it’s legal. It’s a petty reason but it’s legal.Note: I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. If you are concerned about the legality of any situation then consult a lawyer licensed in the appropriate state with the appropriate area of expertise (i.e. don’t talk to a contract lawyer about a labor issue).Q: Is it legal for an employer in the United States to fire you for putting in applications for other jobs? My separation notice says “employee started actively looking for other employment-terminated”.

I just finished a trip in all three of these countries and I'm a fluent Russian speaker. Although these former Soviet Union countries have a significant Russian-speaking presence, I noticed a few differences. Here’s my take on each one:ARMENIA- After I landed in Yerevan, I went and bought a SIM card at a kiosk. They spoke satisfactory English with me and I asked the service representative (in Russian) how commonly spoken is Russian in Armenia and they happily told me that everyone speaks Russian in this country. Every stranger I met spoke Russian expect for one 16-year-old (I told our bus driver about this and he told me that was rare because Russian still has a significant presence in their educational system). Their speaking quality varied. Whether they spoke it impeccably or just enough, they all had a heavy Armenian accent. Russian is quite popular here.GEORGIA- Now Georgia, on the other hand, was interesting for me. Due to the Russo-Georgian territorial conflict with Abkhazia and South Ossetia [which make up 20% of Georgian territory (Al Jazeera, 2015], the English language is slowly preceding Russian as the lingua franca. The majority speak Russian, but a fair amount refrain from using it. My Georgian guide would answer me in English when I asked her something in Russian. Our 20-something-year-old waitress only understood basic Russian (maybe voluntarily).On the other hand, the Georgian bus driver was struggling to tell another tourist something and I interpreted in Russian and he was very happy for my help. Most customer service places were willing to use Russian, but I could slightly sense the reluctance in the air. The Georgian accent is very heavy and noticeable. Russian is becoming less-and-less popular in Georgia.AZERBAIJAN (MAINLAND)- I had little to no issues here. Practically everyone I ran into or needed to speak with knew Russian. Their accent had a Turkish feel to it. There were some that only had basic knowledge. I could communicate with practically anyone. There was one guy I met whom only spoke Azerbaijani. I’d say Russian is fairly popular here.NAKHICHEVAN (AZERI EXCLAVE)- This part is separated from the Azerbaijan mainland. It borders Armenia, Iran, and slightly Turkey. I spent about 2 days in this small autonomous region and I didn't meet a single person that spoke Russian. Some knew only keywords or small phrases. I asked for ice cream and he said, “No English.” I said мороженое (morozhenoe) and he automatically understood and pointed to the ice cream place. I had no luck with anybody else. Based on my experience, I’d say Russian is not all that popular here. A good reason for this could be its geopolitical position.These are my thoughts based on my travels. If anyone has had a different experience with this, feel free to let me know.REFERENCE MAP:STRENGTH OF THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE FROM STRONGEST TO WEAKEST:#1: Armenia#2: Azerbaijan#3: Georgia#4: Nakhichevan (Azeri exclave)HEAVIEST ACCENT:#1: Georgia#2: Armenia#3: AzerbaijanEXTRA SOURCES:The creeping Russian border in Georgiahttps://www.researchgate.net/figure/260368590_fig1_Fig-1-Map-of-the-South-Caucasus-with-disputed-areas-of-unresolved-conflicts

You’ve got a number of answers here from MIT alumni, who honestly sound rather elitist, and therefore may not be giving you the proper perspective.When you ask if Georgia Tech is in the same ranks as MIT, Caltech, Stanford and UCB, there are three factors to consider:How selective is Georgia Tech compared to those four schools you mentioned? In other words, how difficult is it to be accepted to Georgia Tech?How does the quality of engineering education you will receive at Georgia Tech compare to the other four schools?How will employers look at a Georgia Tech degree in comparison to the other four schools?To answer the first question, Georgia Tech is significantly less selective than MIT, Caltech and Stanford. And it is slightly less selective than UCB, but not by the same order of magnitude as the other three.So your average admit to Georgia Tech is likely to be less accomplished than your average admit to MIT. But what exactly does that mean?Well, it’s very important to remember that we are talking about high school accomplishments, and the preoccupation society has with elite selective colleges has warped our perception of how much weight to give to those accomplishments. Common sense should dictate that a person’s potential for greatness should boil down to a lot more than their SAT scores and what extra curricular activities they had in high school.So what is the real difference between the admit pool of MIT and the admit pool of Georgia Tech?Both groups will consist of students of above average intelligence. The main difference is that MIT is not just looking for smart kids, but they want you to have documented evidence of extraordinary potential, for them to admit you. Keyword is evidence. There are likely to be kids in the Georgia Tech pool who have extraordinary potential, but just don’t have the evidence to show it by the time they’re in high school. There are also likely to be kids in the MIT pool who showed early signs that they might have extraordinary potential, but ended up being rather ordinary.A lot of this boils down to the environment you were in growing up. Nurture versus nature. Were you in an environment that tried to squeeze out every drop of potential you might have, to groom you for schools like MIT? Or did you live the life of a normal teenager when you were in high school? There are plenty of people in this world who do have extraordinary potential, but never showed it in high school because they were busy being normal teenagers.So while it may be tempting to assume that the MIT pool is full of significantly more brilliant kids than the Georgia Tech pool, just because fewer demonstrate what MIT is looking for while in high school, the reality is quite a bit cloudier.Let’s move on to the next question, concerning the quality of education you will receive. Of course, quality in education is subjective, and as an educator there are two different goals you can aspire to:Push every student to their maximum potential, in particular ensuring that the students at the top of the class are pushed to their limits.Ensure every student reaches a minimum standard level, in particular ensuring that the students at the bottom of the class don’t fall behind.In an ideal world, instructors would be able to teach in such a way as to maximize both of these goals equally without compromise. But in the real imperfect world, you are lucky to have a teacher who is very good at accomplishing one of these two goals.At schools like MIT/Caltech, the culture is such that there’s an extreme bias towards the first goal over the second. The professors assume that there are going to be a lot of kids with extraordinary potential in their classes, since that’s the admission criteria, and so they see it as their duty to push those kids to their full potential.So at MIT/Caltech, you will probably get a much higher workload and harder problem sets in your normal classes.Georgia Tech, on the other hand, is more likely to focus on the second goal. When professors are teaching a very difficult concept, they are more likely to spend time thinking about how they can present the concept in such a way that all the students in the class will be able to appreciate it, not just the most brilliant students.Note that I assume the students who struggle the most at MIT/Caltech would be better off at Georgia Tech. In fact, I would assume that any student who is close to the median at MIT/Caltech would be better off at Georgia Tech.Why? Well, because I have actually talked to “average students” at MIT who confessed to me that they still struggle to understand some of the more advanced concepts that I learned at a less prestigious university. Obviously, they will still do fine because of the MIT brand name, but they probably would have learned more in an environment with less pressure, where they have more time to digest advanced concepts, and they are given problem sets that challenge them but don’t overwhelm them.So if learning is your goal, don’t automatically assume MIT/Caltech is better than Georgia Tech. You should also keep in mind that Georgia Tech does maintain very high minimum standards—most of your professors there will have been at the top of their class at places like MIT.I am sure the professors at Georgia Tech will be more than happy to find additional challenges for students who want additional challenges. The only real difference between MIT/Caltech and Georgia Tech is that the latter will require you to push yourself more if you want to be challenged as much as you would be at MIT/Caltech. Are you self-motivated? Can you push yourself hard?Notice that I haven’t mentioned Stanford or UCB yet. That’s because these two schools have even different educational philosophies.To blunt, the culture at Stanford is not to push their undergrads too hard because they don’t want to hurt their precious self-esteem. So if you’re not self-motivated, I doubt you would learn more at Stanford than Georgia Tech. And if you are self-motivated, you will have more or less the same opportunities as an undergrad at both Stanford and Georgia Tech. So I see no educational advantage to Stanford over Georgia Tech, other than branding.Berkeley is interesting. Like MIT/Caltech, Berkeley pushes its students hard, but it doesn’t assume that its students are extraordinarily gifted, so maybe not quite as hard as MIT/Caltech. You are also more likely to have a class at Berkeley that fails both goals (doesn’t help the students at the top of the class or the students at the bottom). Classes are hit or miss at Berkeley, and there’s a huge amount of bureaucracy to contend with.That said, if you are a very self-motivated student, Berkeley will provide you resources that are just as good if not better than the other schools.So hopefully I have convinced you that in many scenarios, you would learn just as much at Georgia Tech as you would at MIT, Caltech, Stanford or Berkeley.Finally, what will employers think?From the limited knowledge that I have, they like Georgia Tech a lot!MIT/Caltech kids may have a slight advantage initially at getting interviews, simply because those schools have a certain mystique about them (which quite frankly I think is a little overrated).But if you distinguish yourself as a top student at Georgia Tech, there’s no reason that employers won’t be knocking on your door. Keep in mind that Georgia Tech is one of the best schools in the South, so employers that are regional to that area may actually put more effort into recruiting from Georgia Tech than MIT. There is a such thing as a regional advantage. The chances of getting someone from MIT to move to Atlanta are slim, so why put a lot of effort there?On the other hand, I would automatically assume that you would be disadvantaged for jobs in the Boston area with a Georgia Tech degree rather than an MIT degree. People from Massachusetts (who didn’t go to MIT) tend to be just as cynical about the elitism of MIT/Harvard as I am. That’s not to say they won’t interview them, but if they detect an elitist attitude (like some of the answers here), they might be more inclined to hire the Georgia Tech grad who doesn’t have that superiority complex.I would say that the one job market where the MIT/Caltech degree will give you the biggest advantage is California.Now if we’re comparing Georgia Tech to Berkeley or Stanford, in terms of ease of finding employment, I think that the difference is going to be marginal.In other words, if this is a clustering problem, I would tend to group Georgia Tech, Berkeley and Stanford in the same class.And I would group MIT and Caltech is separate class, but note that probably 30%–60% of the students at MIT/Caltech would be better served if they had gone elsewhere.And Stanford, in particular, is incredibly overrated. It’s incredibly difficult to get into, but in terms of outcomes, it doesn’t really do that much better than schools that are much easier to get into. Arguably, it does worse.And between Berkeley and Georgia Tech, they’re close enough in standards, that if Georgia Tech gives you a significantly better offer financially, then I would choose Georgia Tech.