[Spring Hillian]

What you refer to is called "employment at will".

Originally Posted by Jo48

Right to Work means right to fired with no reasons given.

[Jo48]

Originally Posted by Spring Hillian

The fact that it's a right to work state, which means that you cannot be forced to join a union in order to obtain or keep a job, has nothing to do with your husband's holiday pay.

If he is working on a given day that is his normal shift, and it turns out to be a holiday, he should be paid more? I think not.

Your not "up north" where the civil service unions have and continue to
bankrupt local governments.

You second paragraph is not true. My daughter works in Loss Prevention (not civil service) and has worked for both NATIONAL ("up North" and in FLORIDA) retail chains, and supermarkets. When her shift falls on a Holiday, she gets time and a half. She is considered "management" and cannot join a union. Who pays for this? YOU the consumer does. If you don't like it, you can shop someplace, but you will have find out the particular chain's compensation policy! Fortune 500 corporations don't change their HR policies from North to South. Have you ever worked for a Fortune 500 corporation? I have.

I have worked for a national non-profit agency for the disabled (Medicade TAX DOLLARS and contributions) in a group home. Disabled people don't take holidays off either. They still needed to be fed, toileted, clothes washed, supervised, etc. We did NOT have a Union, but I was paid DOUBLE TIME to work on Holidays. Yep, TAX DOLLARS!

You don't need to be in a "civi service union up North" to get FAIR PAY: for profit businesses and non-profits, both North and South, do give them.

[Jo48]

Originally Posted by Sweetbottoms

Well because its a right to work state my husband (in Law Enforcement) does not get any holiday pay, for ANY holiday or any bonus. Never has. Their reason? Crime doesn't take a holiday so why should we pay you for one... Not thrilled about that. Up north he got double pay on holidays .

Read my post about my daughter who works in LP. Personally, I think with his law enforcement background, your husband down here would be better off working for a national business chain in Security. Besides all the OT she gets, my daughter also gets a bonus, plus very good benefits. Again, it has to be for a NATIONAL chain (Fortune 500), not some small business.

Working for the state of Florida, to put it bluntly, sucks, and will only get worse. I quit in August. If I was staying in Florida, I would apply to the non-profits.

[Spring Hillian]

What on earth does this have to do with "right to work" or "employment at will" which was the subject of this thread.

Originally Posted by Jo48

You second paragraph is not true. My daughter works in Loss Prevention (not civil service) and has worked for both NATIONAL ("up North" and in FLORIDA) retail chains, and supermarkets. When her shift falls on a Holiday, she gets time and a half. She is considered "management" and cannot join a union. Who pays for this? YOU the consumer does. If you don't like it, you can shop someplace, but you will have find out the particular chain's compensation policy! Fortune 500 corporations don't change their HR policies from North to South. Have you ever worked for a Fortune 500 corporation? I have.

I have worked for a national non-profit agency for the disabled (Medicade TAX DOLLARS and contributions) in a group home. Disabled people don't take holidays off either. They still needed to be fed, toileted, clothes washed, supervised, etc. We did NOT have a Union, but I was paid DOUBLE TIME to work on Holidays. Yep, TAX DOLLARS!

You don't need to be in a "civi service union up North" to get FAIR PAY: for profit businesses and non-profits, both North and South, do give them.

[Cruzincat]

Originally Posted by Magnulus

Many states are "at will" for employment, and thisi s more common. Right to work, on the other hand is more insidious since it breaks the backs of unions and removes a major source of their power (since unions cannot negotiate to have closed workplaces), and "Right to Work" tends to go hand-in-hand with "red" states.

I think right to work is wrong. If a bunch of employees want to use their collective power to close a business to non-union members, they should have the right to do so. However, unions are not very popular in red states with conservatives, who will babble on incessantly about Communism/Socialism= unions.

I realize this is an old post, but I have to respond. If a closed shop is so desirable, why not get your union employees together and open an "employee owned" business and compete with the current one? Can't compete? I wonder why!

[Savvy62523]

In Florida this is a problem. I think an employee should have some rights. I have found that a manager can and will fire you with no reason or because they don't like you. I have found that a manager that has insane expectations can cost several people their livelihood and noone questions who the problem really is. I have found that at the end of all this the employer is only interested in covering their behinds and will almost always back these bad managers. I prefer to be in a union environment so that an employee can have some rights. This is nonsense in this economy. I don't feel an employer should have to keep a bad employee, but I think we dont realize that one manager is not the employer. The higher ups should have a handle on rogue middle management. I speak from a very bad experience of working for a crazy person.

[mr&mrssunshine]

I am an employer. I have also been an employee in the Uk. I have to say I am very anti union as IMO they were close to the death knell for UK manufacturers.

HOWEVER I have to say as an employer I think the 'right to fire cos I feel like it' works badly both ways. its hard to get good people mainly because a lot seem to feel they could get fired and any time and therefore dont put in that 'extra' because there is no reward or incentive. employers should make workers feel valued and appreciated not rule by fear.

a buddy of mine got laid off after 14 years with the same company, no notice no comp nothing. i was chatting to him and asked him if it was unusual for workers to get bonuses etc and he told me he had never got one in the whole 14 . i explained the reason for the question was I had a couple of my guys bust their balls all week and on the friday afternoon, I told them to leave early and gave them 20 bucks each to go get a beer....their faces where like 'whats this??'

I have always believed in a couple of simple rules, never ask anyone to do something you wouldnt do and treat everyone as your equal...I learned from a great guy, his philosophy was 'they breath the same air as me so i treat them the same'.

[FloridaKash]

Originally Posted by mr&mrssunshine

I am an employer. I have also been an employee in the Uk. I have to say I am very anti union as IMO they were close to the death knell for UK manufacturers.

HOWEVER I have to say as an employer I think the 'right to fire cos I feel like it' works badly both ways. its hard to get good people mainly because a lot seem to feel they could get fired and any time and therefore dont put in that 'extra' because there is no reward or incentive. employers should make workers feel valued and appreciated not rule by fear.

a buddy of mine got laid off after 14 years with the same company, no notice no comp nothing. i was chatting to him and asked him if it was unusual for workers to get bonuses etc and he told me he had never got one in the whole 14 . i explained the reason for the question was I had a couple of my guys bust their balls all week and on the friday afternoon, I told them to leave early and gave them 20 bucks each to go get a beer....their faces where like 'whats this??'

I have always believed in a couple of simple rules, never ask anyone to do something you wouldnt do and treat everyone as your equal...I learned from a great guy, his philosophy was 'they breath the same air as me so i treat them the same'.

First off - sounds like you are a good employer... your workers are thankful I am sure. Second off, sucks for your buddy that he was willing to stay at a place for 14 years that didn't give him bonuses or any kind of comp when they laid him off. My assumption is that he was treated poorly during his 14 years there... but allowed it to happen. He worked there when the economy was booming so he really missed out. That's a shame.

IMO - Employers should be able to terminate employees for whatever reason they see fit. With that said - it is in a workers best interest to go to work for companies that have policies in place where they have to write you up and what not before they terminate (many companies are like this even in right to work states). More so, if you work for a company that doesn't provide a bonus once a year... you should go find work else where.

Many people let themselves be taken advantage of. They chose to work and continue to work for a company that refuses to show their employees that they value them. The fact is, the more talented people go to work for companies who demonstrate they value their employees. This is why companies have performance bonus programs, 6 month reviews, benefit packages and severance packages.

[kyle19125]

Originally Posted by boxus

No, right to work means a person does not have to join a union if they want employment. That means that if I want a job, I am not forced to join a union and pay union dues, a violation of me freedom of association rights as I am being forced to associate.

It has nothing to do with reasons for firing, hiring, or anything unless you are implying union representation when you got fired.

An employer can fire you for any lawful reason, they can fire you for no reason anywhere in the US as long as it is not discriminatory. An employer is most likely to produce a reason because it is protection against discrimination complaints.

Wrong. That's where the "Right to Work' implication comes in.

In Right to Work states an employer can fire you because "you looked at me funny".

In non-Right to Work states an employer has to document multiple "you looked at me funny" incidents (usually two, with the third at dismissal) and there has to be some kind of breach of company regulations for that to take place in the first place....without legal recourse anyway.

[Spring Hillian]

Please learn what a "right to work state" is.

Originally Posted by faheemah

This is a bad thing. Just imagine working for a company for 25 or more years. Now comes the time when you may want to retire. I have seen and heard plenty of stories where these companies have gotten rid of that employee and now that employee has nothing. They could not even get their retirement they were entitle to. One said they went to a lawyer and was told there was nothing they can do for them It is a right to work state. It is sad that,that person has nothing but social security and cannot maintain their living