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.
Job applicants and new employees are often perplexed to read--in a job application, employment contract, or employee handbook--that they will be employed "at will." They are even more troubled when they find out exactly what this language means: An at-will employee can be fired at any time, for any reason. If the employer decides to let you go, that's the end of your job--and you have very limited legal rights to fight your termination.
If you are employed at will, your employer does not need good cause to fire you. In every state but Montana (which protects employees who have completed an initial "probationary period" from being fired without cause), employers are free to adopt at-will employment policies, and many of them have. In fact, unless your employer gives some clear indication that it will only fire employees for good cause, the law presumes that you are employed at will.
This article will help you figure out whether you're employed at will, what rights you have as an at-will employee, and what you should do if your prospective or current employer asks you to sign an at-will agreement.
It also protects the employee in the event that the employee leaves without giving notice or reason. The employer cannot sue the employee for any loss.
There was a day when Unions were a good thing in the US, but now the vast majority are just a legal form of organized crime .....
My grandfather went to work for the coal mines when he was 13; he was an early union organizer and was blackballed by a number of places for his efforts back when unions served a legitimate purpose. My mom was delivered by a company doctor and the family shopped at the company store. Fast forward a number of decades and his son (my uncle, a tradesman) is at a union meeting. My uncle doesn't think the finances are right and asks to examine the books. He was taken aside after the meeting and told that if he knows what is good for him he will never enquire about the union's finances or ask to see the books again.
I used to be a supporter of unions, but over time I've come to realize that they're not necessarily the altruistic protectors of labor rights that they portray themselves to be. Far too frequently, they're run by people who want to pad their resumes by scoring labor "victories" that force companies to become increasingly burdened with excessive regulations and wages that aren't justified by market economics. Unions also protect a lot of workers who really shouldn't be protected - people that even their other union colleagues wish would just leave, but can't be so easily dismissed because all they have to do is run off crying like a little b*tch to the NLRB and claim "harassment."
Many years ago, before off-shoring of labor became what it is today, my dad was a psychiatrist in a town where there used to be a Big Three automobile plant. The way he told it, some of his patients were union workers who worked at this facility who told him about how they would 'get even' with their bosses by intentionally doing shoddy work. I dated a girl in high school whose dad worked at one of these plants, and she passed along his stories about how people would drink beer on their lunch breaks and go back to work on assembly lines.
And some people wonder why American automobile makers struggle to compete against Toyota, lol. Maybe it's because unions protect mediocrity and incompetence. That's really what a large element of this society has become. People who support unions are typically mediocre people who want pedestrian lives, who haven't invested any pride into their work. They just expect a paycheck and think simply being present on the worksite makes them entitled to it. They're just a step above most welfare recipients.
"I'm entitled to a house, and I'm entitled to a sub-prime loan to get it."
"I'm entitled to a Cadillac Escalade even though I earn $8/hour at McDonald's."
"I'm entitled to a college degree even if I have to pay $200,000 to flunk out of three schools before I get it."
"I'm entitled to loan forgiveness 'cause I was too lazy to read that not paying it on time would actually result in interests and penalties."
"I'm entitled to endless jobless benefits because I worked as a travel agent in 1999 and I just refuse to accept that this field has vanished thanks to e-ticketing."
"I'm entitled to be an incompetent, pain-in-the-ass employee who forces other more qualified co-workers to clean up the sh*t I leave behind me and force employers to spend hours writing up paperwork and even talking to government officials and lawyers to defend their decisions to try to discipline me."
Entitlement syndrome is killing this country. This is not the America that landed on the moon, nor the one that beat back communism. This is not the America of Lewis and Clark, nor the one of the Gold Rush. This is the America that can't even tie its own shoelaces. This is the America that doesn't want to be better. This is what we've become. Frankly, I sh*t on anyone who contributes to this America. I want nothing of it. I want excellence. When did a quest for excellence become synonymous with abuse?
Last edited by chickenfriedbananas; 09-07-2014 at 06:41 AM..
In government unions are largely the norm. I'm not saying they are good or bad but you have to respect the right to organize while at the same time come to the table and negociate.
In some respects dealing with a organized workforce can be simpler and easier then non union. How? Because if you have individual contracts for top staff that are non union it means renegotiating takes that much longer and frankly due to the openness it makes it easier to view other communities and organizations agreements to see what the market shows.
There is no entitlement syndrome the markets are changing as baby boomers retire and it creates openings. That coupled with the downsizing that happened after 2008 means they have to restaff. It might not look like the 1990's where companies came out of nowhere but maybe like the early 1970's where some bragged about hiring.
The concept of unionizing is fine. How it works in practice based on human incompetence is what causes the problems.
What I've noticed is that most people would rather be screwed over by those they view as "better" than them (CEO's, VP's etc.) than getting screwed over by your local union leader or fellow employee. It's part of the reason why companies have most employees over a barrel. They've convinced us that we should just accept what they give us because unions are bad.
It's why so many Americans get mad at athletes (workers) for stubbornly negotiating contracts and labor agreements but always want to side with owners (management).
The elite have somehow convinced us that we should protect their interests against our own interests. You could ask "what's the alternative?" I'm not sure.
I used to be a supporter of unions, but over time I've come to realize that they're not necessarily the altruistic protectors of labor rights that they portray themselves to be. Far too frequently, they're run by people who want to pad their resumes by scoring labor "victories" that force companies to become increasingly burdened with excessive regulations and wages that aren't justified by market economics. Unions also protect a lot of workers who really shouldn't be protected - people that even their other union colleagues wish would just leave, but can't be so easily dismissed because all they have to do is run off crying like a little b*tch to the NLRB and claim "harassment."
Many years ago, before off-shoring of labor became what it is today, my dad was a psychiatrist in a town where there used to be a Big Three automobile plant. The way he told it, some of his patients were union workers who worked at this facility who told him about how they would 'get even' with their bosses by intentionally doing shoddy work. I dated a girl in high school whose dad worked at one of these plants, and she passed along his stories about how people would drink beer on their lunch breaks and go back to work on assembly lines.
And some people wonder why American automobile makers struggle to compete against Toyota, lol. Maybe it's because unions protect mediocrity and incompetence. That's really what a large element of this society has become. People who support unions are typically mediocre people who want pedestrian lives, who haven't invested any pride into their work. They just expect a paycheck and think simply being present on the worksite makes them entitled to it. They're just a step above most welfare recipients.
"I'm entitled to a house, and I'm entitled to a sub-prime loan to get it."
"I'm entitled to a Cadillac Escalade even though I earn $8/hour at McDonald's."
"I'm entitled to a college degree even if I have to pay $200,000 to flunk out of three schools before I get it."
"I'm entitled to loan forgiveness 'cause I was too lazy to read that not paying it on time would actually result in interests and penalties."
"I'm entitled to endless jobless benefits because I worked as a travel agent in 1999 and I just refuse to accept that this field has vanished thanks to e-ticketing."
"I'm entitled to be an incompetent, pain-in-the-ass employee who forces other more qualified co-workers to clean up the sh*t I leave behind me and force employers to spend hours writing up paperwork and even talking to government officials and lawyers to defend their decisions to try to discipline me."
Entitlement syndrome is killing this country. This is not the America that landed on the moon, nor the one that beat back communism. This is not the America of Lewis and Clark, nor the one of the Gold Rush. This is the America that can't even tie its own shoelaces. This is the America that doesn't want to be better. This is what we've become. Frankly, I sh*t on anyone who contributes to this America. I want nothing of it. I want excellence. When did a quest for excellence become synonymous with abuse?
I agree, 100 years ago unions served their purpose, they were great for the average worker that was forced into 7 day work weeks for just enough money to survive, today that is not what a union worker has become. I know several people in unions, they all work 6 months out of the year, because their unions demand wages so high that normal companies will not hire them (and people wonder why they are so involved in politics, they are just protecting their scheme that we all pay for), so they wait for the next government contract, meaning they work for their $36-40 an hour plus per Diem for 50 hours a week for about 6 months, then come home spend 6 months sitting around drawing unemployment, with some even figuring out how to get on public assistance after they have been home for 3 months, all the while paying $3000-4000 a year in union dues and complaining how evil corporations are, and how bad employees have it. At the end of the year they end up making $75,000 before their union dues are subtracted every year and say how anyone not in a union are just stupid. (all that down time might be part of the reason so many union propagandists always show up on message boards, they are just waiting for another government job to start so all of us tax payers can overpay them)
Meanwhile the top independent guys work most of the year for $25 an hour plus per diem, although usually less then 50 hours a week, and they bring home $100,000+ a year but are called stupid for not falling for the union line.
Fact is unions are there to use the bargaining power away from the top performers and use that to bring up the bottom performers, everybody is equal in a union, whether you can perform the job better than anybody in the world or you are the worst in the world, everybody is treated equal. All raises, promotions, and benefits are based on how long you have been with the union and any certifications you have gotten from the union. It is terrible for the ones who actually want to work and do a good job.
Between the way unions have destroyed US industries forcing companies to offshore many manufacturing jobs where they can pay their employees, the costs of shipping, and the import taxes and still come out far enough ahead to deal with the headaches that come from offshoring. the corruption of having the mafia deeply involved, all their political involvement, and all the other crap that people have to deal with is it any wonder that many top performers no longer are interested in joining a union? Especially since most people with common sense understand that not all business owners are evil, in fact most of the successful companies out there understand you have to treat your employees well. Without those top performers unions are going to continue to struggle, and trying to demonize all companies and all non union members is not going to help them change that, and over time I feel it will only make their reputations worse.
The concept of unionizing is fine. How it works in practice based on human incompetence is what causes the problems.
What I've noticed is that most people would rather be screwed over by those they view as "better" than them (CEO's, VP's etc.) than getting screwed over by your local union leader or fellow employee. It's part of the reason why companies have most employees over a barrel. They've convinced us that we should just accept what they give us because unions are bad.
It's why so many Americans get mad at athletes (workers) for stubbornly negotiating contracts and labor agreements but always want to side with owners (management).
The elite have somehow convinced us that we should protect their interests against our own interests. You could ask "what's the alternative?" I'm not sure.
We have a term for what you describe, and it's called "brainwashing."
The elite figured out long ago how easy it is to brainwash the masses into protecting their interest. The human mind after all is a very suggestive muscle, and when you're dealing with imperfect creatures, it doesn't take a whole lot of effort to make it think a certain way...
Let's look at the false construct that unions are no longer relevant. Since 1980 unions have been on the decline, but so has wages and benefits. Less unions and less wages and benefits is a credible argument. Retail clerks unions have been replaced with minimum wage Walmart workers. The trucking industry has turned drivers into owner operators who can barely keep their heads above water. Two people can work for the same company and one is an hourly employee and another is an independent contractor getting screwed by the employer. As the middle class dwindles, so does the buying power for the working class. How is it good for business if people can't afford their products? This anti union ideal is a foolish one and only drives down American wages, and is proven if you look back since 1980 and compare it with the CPI.
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.
