Lets say that you work at place where there is no union and you don’t have a contract with your employer. Can your boss fire you because of your race? Does he need a reason to fire you?
I am not a lawyer, I am not your lawyer, I have not had any law classes, I have not slept at a Holiday Inn last night.
In an at will state an employer can let an employee go for any reason that is not a prohibited reason by law. I believe race is a prohibited reason but an employer does not need a reason in an at will state
There is a list of prohibited reasons such as sex, race, country of origin, national creed, religion and maybe a few more.
Other than that, sure they can fire you for any reason or no reason. You wear too much red. Gone.
In most circumstances, businesses don’t like firing people for no reason. If there is a money problem, or maybe not, they can have a lay off if they are big enough. Small businesses sometimes just pick the person they like least to be fired.
You may near stories about people getting fired for “no reason” more than the reality of it. Businessed commonly fire people (or get them to quit) without saying exactly why they are doing it. It helps avoid lawsuits and the like.
Like someone else said, in an at will state, you can be fired for almost any reason at all, you could be fired becuase you’re a slacker, or you could be fired because it’s Tuesday. You can’t be fired becuase you’re black, but you could be fired becuase you have black hair. Of course this opens the employer up to unemployment claims, but that’s another thread.
What then is the basis for “wrongful termination” suits?
Generally they try and argue that they were fired for sex, race, country of origin, national creed, religious reasons.
In the United States employers will almost all of the time get away with firing an employee if they want to, more or less.
Even in States that aren’t “at will” showing proper cause for termination isn’t typically that difficult. Some employers are downright devious about setting employees up in situations that insure they’ll do something to bring about a “just cause” termination.
And then employers can typically rest easy based on the fact that the overwhelming majority of people fired in the United States never contest their termination, they start collecting unemployment and start looking for other employment.
On the flip side, lot’s of companies voluntarily establish guidelines and regulate themselves. For example many corporate handbooks will specify that employees will not be dismissed without cause. Which, while not a contract per se, situations like that are considered exceptions to the at will employment, and corporations that regulate themselves in that manner do indeed have to show cause for termination even in an at will state.
From what I understand, the anti-discrimination laws that establish the reasons for which you can’t fire someone are Federal, and thus in force throughout all 50 states and DC.
True, but most states and some localities have additional laws anti-discrimination laws that provide more protection than federal law. For instance, many states prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, which federal law does not protect.
Another protected class that was not mentioned above is age. In particular, the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act prohibits age discrimination against workers over 40.
This is, of course, only applicable in the U.S. Many other countries have laws that restrict businesses from firing employees without good reason, and provide much more worker protection than under American law. This is a point of political and economic debate in countries like France and Germany, where some believe the worker protection laws are a large contributor to relatively slow economic growth because businesses may be reluctant to hire new employees in boom times for fear they will be unable to reduce their work force in slowdowns. Further discussion of this question is, I’m sure, a matter for Great Debates.
Old thread on the issue of at-will employment and wrongful termination
Another one
Excellent discussion of the at-will doctrine and its exceptions
Good day.
Ok, the last link wasn’t as good as I remembered it to be. This one even has maps
It’s nice to warn people when a link goes to a PDF as opposed to a normal HTML document.
:smack: Oops. Sorry folks.
If you are fired for no valid reason and you go to the labor board about unemployment, the employer has no leg to stand on. You will get the money they paid in.
That’s why it’s very rarely done.
This is in the US of course.
What are you referring to? What states? How? Why?
I was fired a couple of years ago and they refused to give me any reason at all. I figured that I didn’t have anything to lose so I just stayed in the “firing room” and told them I wasn’t leaving without a cause. After several managers and others were brought in to address this, I still had absolutely no idea what was going on.
I gave up and left. There was nothing I could do.
“Fuck’em” is the mature response.
I think I understand what you are talking about now. The former employee can collect unemployment. That is rarely an issue with most businesses though. Their rates may go up but almost all businesses have to get rid of employees from time to time the increase isn’t shocking like they were the only ones to do that. The rate increase isn’t much of a disincentive to get rid of who you want. My FIL is the owner and CEO of a company. He just got rid of two high level managers for “no cause” and had a third arrested for embezzlement. Unemployment insurance rates are not a top priority for most especially compared to the alternative.