+1 for getting it in writing. She can just write an email to the two managers saying "We talked and said there would be consequences if I did not take down my CV. What exactly would these consequences be?"

I wonder if it's better to call the bluff and say "if I'm that invaluable to you then give me the raise I'm asking for." I think this bullying is gendered; men are perceived to handle these situations competitively more often and it may be appropriate.

Actually I'm right: if they care then it's definitely a bluff. "We care about you leaving so much that we're considering firing you." No. False. Fail.

+1 for the first paragraph. Mom & Dad have to stay out of the workplace. Time for daughter to fight her own battles. Good answer.

A couple of things in this answer only make sense in 'at will' states in the USA. In the rest of the world she would be better off getting fired from a financial perspective. Especially if she has evidence that the reason she got fired was because of those profiles.

@DavidMulder Even in a number of non "at will" states in the USA. Resigning would be beneficial to being fired, that said the specifics and what make sense will vary by extremes depending on where this person is located. Some places this could be an actable wrongful termination (assuming you can get solid evidence) others it's life.

@djechlin - It might not be a bluff and is more likely just a matter of control. They don't really care if she's there or not, but they want her to obey them. Besides, everyone has been assuming the "consequeneces" are getting fired. For all we know it could be a pay cut, switching to menial tasks, or being given awful hours.

@DavidK in many places those consequences would fall into the realm of forcing someone to quit by making the work environment hostile, and many of those specific items have laws written to protect people in such circumstances. (of coarse this varies place to place, if evidence can be demonstrated, etc. Talk to a local attorney)

There can be legal ramifications, but, many don't have the resources to pursue them. She needs to evaluate her decision based on factors that only she knows. Can she afford a laywer, does she even have a legal case with no proof such a conversation happened, does she need to keep this job to pay her expenses? What I am saying is she has to step away from the question of was this a right thing for her bosses to do and decide what response she should take based on her own personal situation, strongly held beliefs and needs, but recognizing the possible consequences of the action.

It doesn't make sense to me to resign, especially because, if she is fired, she may well be eligible for benefits. That applies even to "at-will" states so I don't know why that's even coming up.

@delchin, I have seen people who just like the power of being able to compel. They view other people as property that they can get rid of but not as free agents who can leave at will. Many people who would make such a threat are perfectly happy to fire you for disobedience. They are mad not because you are valuable but because you took actions they didn't tell you to take. So firing is a real possibility. People act emotionally not logically more often than not. She has challenged their control over her, that is what caused the angry ultimatum not her worth to them.

@emodendroket, if they can prove cause to fire (and they may already have some minor thing like being late too many times that they can use as the official excuse) and if they are vidictive enough, they can prevent you from getting unemplyment or make it difficult enough that it takes a lawyer and a lot of time. Also it is often easier to explain to potential employers that you quit than that you were fired.

@HLGEM Yes, maybe, but most places aren't willing to go to the trouble, for one thing, and for another, I think the concern about having it "look better" when job-seeking is overblown, as they're probably going to hear about it the first time from you, in an interview, and you can give the explanation that will satisfy them there.

@emodendroket, what you are not seeing is these people are not most places. They have already taken an action that 99.9% of businesses would not be willing to do. There is no logic to their actions. They are emotionally out of control and can be trusted to overreact because that is what they have already done.

@HLGEM OK, agreed, but I still think the benefit to resigning (an interview answer that's arguably a little better) is much smaller than what you're giving up (since you're looking at zero chance, then, of collecting, as opposed to some nonzero chance).

@Please write an answer if you disagree with this one comments are not for discussions.

@ReallyTiredOfThisGame Surely you're not proposing everyone post two-sentence answers saying "I mostly agree with this other answer, except for this small point."

@ReallyTiredOfThisGame I think you don't quite get what comments are actually for. They are there for, well, commenting on the answer.

@Nate, The tooltip for "add a comment" is "use comments to ask for more information or to suggest improvements" ReallyTired is right - comments are not for discussion. The downvote and edit("improve this answer) links also have tooltips that clarify how they are expected to be used.

@emonden: That's basically what has happened here and those supplementary answers do get upvotes as they deserve. To me it seems OK for this to happen. Meta is probably the best place to raise this if you disagree about the way comments and answers are being used.

who said the OP has any intention of speaking with the employer?

Just a friendly FYI to everyone here, remember what comments are for. For extended discussions, Get a Room (a chat room). Specifically see the section "When should I comment?" Comments are not intended to be a way to imitate a discussion board.