Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No. My whole point, boils down to the fact that employees should be more empowered, on the job. And abolishing the at will employment rule, would help.
I don't follow how abolishing employment at-will empowers an employee.
The fact I can tell my employer tomorrow to jump off a cliff and suffer absolutely no repercussions (with the exception of probably not being able to use them as a reference) is the biggest empowerment an employee has. If one is talking about the right of their life and destiny.
As for other empowerment in the workplace-- that is something entirely different. Personally, I like being more autonomous and making decisions about my day-- so I moved into those types of roles and acquired the necessary skills, education, and experience to be self-managed, independent, and a decision maker.
If an employer runs a business, they should know what they're getting into. NOBODY said that an employer must guarntee an employee a job, forever.
My whole point, is that the employment at will rule has, and is, used unfairly against employees in the workplace. If it gets abolished, employers will have to make sure that if they fire an employee, that it has to be for just cause, and not for a frivilous reason.
Employees deserve fair treatment, when they work hard for their employers. After all, the employee helps make the employer wealthy, by way of their hard work!
Sometimes people lose their jbos and its no fault of their own but its just business.
Sometimes someoen may not be violating company policies but they are just not the right fit for a certain job.
Your really tying a businessowners hands when your forcing them to have to write someone up 3 times, blah blah blah. Still employers will find a way to fire you and good luck getting a current employee to have your back, they know who's signing their paychecks.
A business owner takes risk, spends money paying you as well as insuring you and shoudln't be told who they can adn cant fire adn for what reasons.
There are protected classes like race, sex, religion, etc, etc, etc.
If your performing and helping the company the boss isn't going to fire you because he doesn't like the color shirt you wore. You think they really want to pay your unemployment, have to find and train a new employee, be without someoen temporarily.
The reason the US car companies failed was because employees couldn't be fired or laid off. There were rooms where employees sat doing nothing getting paid, earning pension and getting full benefits waiting "incase" they needed people to work or demand increased. That's b/c unions could tell the car companies they had to do taht.
In my case, I did what a former idiot boss told me to do, and was still terminated. And the reason had nothing to do with my job performance.
As for being an adult, injustice in any context, shouldn't have to be tolerated. With your mentality on this subject, blacks still wouldn't be able to vote, in the south!
Boy you sure love using the race card! Maybe your former "idiot boss" could tell that you thought them an idiot... and that's why you were fired. But I don't see any proof in your examples that you were fired for being black.
The 'employment at will' doctrine in the workplace, has vastly shifted the balance of power, in favor of the employer. Even if an employer is clearly discriminatory in their hiring and firing practices, the 'employment at will' statute, lets the employer get away with discrimination.
In today's job market, where it's so hard to get (and keep) a job, isn't it time that the 'employment at will' rule, be eliminated in the workplace? Don't employees, especially these days, deserve more workplace empowerment??
You seem to think that all companies have unlimited supplies of money to spend on their employees. Do you not read the news? We are in a global recession and many businesses are struggling to survive in this economy. Why on earth would you want to force them to keep unproductive employees or employees that they can't afford to keep? If you aren't an employee who is an asset to the company, then they have every right to fire you and replace you with a better worker. Employees who are dead weight can cause a company to fail.
I don't follow how abolishing employment at-will empowers an employee..
Simple, it protects an employee from unfair or arbitrary firing. Define that as empowerment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovetheduns
Personally, I like being more autonomous and making decisions about my day-- so I moved into those types of roles and acquired the necessary skills, education, and experience to be self-managed, independent, and a decision maker.
You're a swell guy, give yourself a big pat on the back. But that doesn't mean that others who aren't as swell as you don't need protection.
Why on earth would you want to force them to keep unproductive employees or employees that they can't afford to keep? If you aren't an employee who is an asset to the company, then they have every right to fire you and replace you with a better worker. Employees who are dead weight can cause a company to fail.
You misunderstand what this is about; nobody is saying a boss shouldn't be allowed to fire the unproductive or lay people off when things are slow. This is about unjust firing.
You misunderstand what this is about; nobody is saying a boss shouldn't be allowed to fire the unproductive or lay people off when things are slow. This is about unjust firing.
Define unjust?
To the employer it is definitely unjust to not allow them to manage their business within established laws and regulations.
If the employer doesn't like you-- doesn't like your shirt, doesn't like your attitude, doesn't like your personality-- and if they are paying the paycheck and putting up all of the money to try and operate-- then really it does infringe on their rights.
As long as the employer is not firing you for one of the protected class reasons then the employer should have the right to make decisions they feel are best for their business.
Ironically, I don't know many people who have been fired (not laid off, but fired) who felt that the employer was right in what they did. I think the only one who I knew thought the employer was justified was an ex who rang up a fake return to get some pocket money before payday (he was desperate for cash) and then attempted to replace it come payday but the employer had happened upon it and realized that he had taken the money-- they had a no theft policy and he was immediately terminated. He knew it was a horrible decision in his part that caused him to do that.
We are human beings and tend to rarely be able to be completely honest with ourselves (and sometimes to people's credit we have the inability to even discern that our behavior may not be the best or appreciated by all).
I had an employee who has recently been written up with a warning (he is no longer my employee but his manager had asked me about my coaching notes). The employee is pretty good at his job. I think he is competent and efficient. Sometimes he is not going to do what is expected --although those times are increasingly rare. Most of the time he is going to do his job competently. And sometimes, he will go above and beyond what the job requires.
He has a problem with attendance. BIG problem. He will stroll into work just before 10am (our employer is generally pretty flexible with when you report to work as long as you are not on the phones). Even though our employer is flexible coming in at almost 10am is a little much. You won't ever raise an eyebrow if you come in consistently at 9:30, but past that it is going to raise eyebrows-- especially if you try to leave at 5pm after taking a lunch.
At any rate-- I had warned the guy verbally several times-- especially after he did not show up to a meeting with me, his manager, at 8:30 and it didn't dawn on him that we had a meeting (he never looked at his Outlook) until almost noon. His excuse then was pretty pathetic. He has missed other meetings or come in five minutes passed.
So his current manager with this behavior has given him a written warning and a time period to correct the situation or they will start a terminating process.
The guy (even at review when I showed him the documented tardies where he missed important meetings or came late) didn't feel that this should impact his performance rating. He didn't think it showed irresponsibility. I remember being guffawed that he really thought this was not an issue and he shouldn't be held accountable for it.
So-- long story short of it-- sometimes people can't see what actions they have done that may have led to a termination. The guy is very nice-- very likable, but can't even look at himself objectively and see that it does tell a story about his performance and work ethic.
Fired for reasons unrelated to performence. It happens.
Let me get something straight; are you defending an employers right to fire employees unjustly or are we just trying to define what's unjust? Do you perhaps think that by definition there's no such thing as an unjust firing?
I know you didn't ask me the question, but I will answer. IMHO any reason for a firing other than going against what the current discrimination laws are is not unjust.
When an employee quits the employer without notice it DOES harm the employer.
I have worked with people in the past who have up and quit. They may have left with proprietary knowledge, they may have dropped projects, clients, customers high and dry-- they may have left with key passwords, they may have left with company property-- and in some cases where I have worked and this has happened all of the above has happened in a combination of one or more things.
Lost productivity does hurt an employer to the bottomline-- granted a very large employer may not feel it as keenly as a tiny employer.
I also disagree that an employer should not be entitled to fire someone based on a frivolous reason. If they don't get along with you they should not be forced to keep you around just because it is your livelihood-- it is their money that they are paying you and if you are not a fit-- you are not a fit. Sounds harsh but I don't disagree with it.
I don't see how a contract would not exist in a non at-will employment state. The international employees that work at my firm all have contracts that put them working for the employer for significant periods of time-- if they so choose to leave-- they can not without big penalties. The employer is also stuck as well. Personally- I don't care to work in that environment. I like being a free agent-- and if that carries a little risk of being let go for no reason then so be it.
But then again, I am not the type to linger at a place where I can sense and feel that I am not appreciated nor wanted-- I have left 2 places because of that. I KNEW that if I didn't go on my own it would be inevitable that they would get rid of me.
Apparently, you don't see a lot of things! You can't tell me, that you can't get a temp worker, to replace someone who leaves without notice. Do you know how many people are looking for jobs right now?!
You sound like you want all of the advantages of being an employer, without any of the responsibilities that you owe your employees. Well it doesn't work that way. And if you don't get along with an employee, that could be due to your own attitude towards them. And you should try to mend the relationship. You need to take ownership, of your relationships with your employees.
It's not 'tying the hands' of the employer, to create a more just, humane workplace. If you think that way, then you don't deserve employees. Their efforts help to make the employer well-off. The least that you can do, is treat your employees fairly, and only fire them for reasons related to their performance, misconduct, or the financial situation of your business.
And I don't appreciate some of you posters, accusing me of playing the 'race card'. This thread isn't about race, it's about the employment at will rule. So you posters need to make sure, that you stay on topic, and don't make the thread about ME.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
