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.
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.
YOU are the one who brought up race and accused others of sympathizing with slave owners. YOU should learn to stay on topic.
You started the thread with a discrimination spin and have narrowed it down to a racial discrimination by basically accusing others of being racist for merely not embracing your belief that at-will laws enable discrimination.
The reality is that discrimination laws already exist to protect people. It's clear that you have an agenda. You are baiting.
Last edited by Hopes; 02-04-2011 at 08:38 AM..
Reason: typo
YOU are the on who brought up race and accused others of sympathizing with slave owners. YOU should learn to stay on topic.
You started the thread with a discrimination spin and have narrowed it down to a racial discrimination by basically accusing others of being racist for merely not embracing your belief that at-will laws enable discrimination.
The reality is that discrimination laws already exist to protect people. It's clear that you have an agenda. You are baiting.
NOWHERE in the post you quoted did the poster say anything about YOU!
The slave-owner remarks, were directed at two posters, who made unsavory remarks to me first, and got off topic. Otherwise, all I've said about racism, is that despite the discrimination laws on the books, the employment at will rule, allows employers to get around them. Same goes for laws regarding sex, age, disability, and other forms of workplace discrimination. So I WASN'T making the thread about race!
I would like to see a procedure instituted to avoid BS firings that are so rampant today.
For instance:
A processes of warnings, how will an employee KNOW they are not doing good work or management is unhappy for what every reason unless they are informed and have the opportunity to improve instead of being summarily thrown out the door.
This process would curb the frivolous firings for things like; I don't like the color of your socks or personality conflicts between a particular manager and employee. This process would also retain the employer right to fire, but gives each side a moment to not react in a knee jerk fashion and an opportunity to retain an employee who might be a good worker but has an issue or two or move the employee to another department away from the manager personality conflict.
This process would also retain the employer right to fire, but gives each side a moment to not react in a knee jerk fashion and an opportunity to retain an employee who might be a good worker but has an issue or two or move the employee to another department away from the manager personality conflict.
It's not often knee-jerk. It might seem knee-jerk to the employee who is fired, but often the firing is very calculated by the manager. I have known many managers who ran to HR demanding a way to get rid of someone. Once a manager has decided that he/she no longer wants an employee, the employee really has no hope, regardless of what the employee does to improve. Your suggestion just adds more steps to the process, but the end result would still be the same.
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.