In 33 states you can be fired for being gay.

[Spice_Weasel]

That certainly hasn’t been my experience in the workforce. Would you care to elaborate or provide cites?

Sure. I was pretty doped up on anesthesia when I wrote that (coming down, but not quite there, so if I get goofy, you’ll know why.) But, I of course fundamentally still have the same opinion.

This is what I think. The original idea behind “at-will employment” was based on a pretty fair idea–that employees shouldn’t have to work at a job they hate, and employers shouldn’t have to put up with terrible workers. But that will only function at a time when there is equality between employee-employer – when the employee has an option to find a job that will treat him/her fairly. That time is not now.

I have done a great deal of volunteer work at local worker’s centers, and I have also, in the last five years, held six minimum-wage jobs. It is not too hard to find a job – a good candidate could probably score one within 2 weeks to 3 months, depending on the situation. I’m not bitching about “unemployment”, I’m bitching about “job security” – which means a person’s understanding that they will keep their job and will continue to be treated fairly. “Job security” now days is nothing compared to what it used to be. Employers have an endless pool of job applicants to choose from and they know it, and they treat their employees as absolutely expendable. They will promise them hours upon hire that they never receive, they will demand they work more hours when they originally agreed upon less, they will arbitrarily fire them so they can hire someone cheaper, they will dick around on paying them, they will make them work in substandard safety conditions, sexually harass them, shout racial slurs, and just generally treat employees like shit.

In a perfect world, the employee would throw up his/her hands and say, “I quit!” and go find another job that will treat them more fairly. But this is precisely the problem… there is no “other job” that will treat them more fairly. There are other jobs that will also willingly exploit them, but of course that’s another month to three months of pay they are losing by spending all that time job hunting, and once they get re-hired, it’s the same old shit.

If you’ve worked a minimum wage job within the last five years, and you never felt you were taken advantage of, manipulated, or treated unfairly, then you are very, very fortunate. Exploitation happens everywhere, all the time, and fair treatment is the exception rather than the norm. It is the reason my recently divorced mother, who has 12 years of experience running a business and an MS in Mechanical Engineering, is working a low-wage factory job that stiffs her hours, jerks her around, and turned her down for a management position because, according to the employer, “She could do MY job! wink, wink” If you honestly think she has good odds of finding anything better, you have a lot to learn about the way the world works. The average person can’t AFFORD to run around looking for a new job every six months–they’ve got bills to pay, mouths to feed, etc.

[Sarahfeena]

@kung fu lola

“Moving farther away” - what would be the analogy for an workplace? If it’s the same as “downsizing” or “relocating”, then those are both existing valid reasons for termination that I have no beef with. “Best friend” - that analogy is nepotism, which is pretty despicable. I would hate to live in fear that my boss might give my job to his golf buddy someday.

These weren’t meant to be directly analogous…you asked, given good service, etc., why would you switch? And I was giving illustrative examples. The point is, do you want to have the option of switching for whatever reason you may have, or not? Do you think that you are the best judge of which dry cleaners you want to use?

Everybody says this, but it never works that way in the real world, especially not in the service sector. It’s one of those “good management practices” that everyone like to pretend they live by, but no one does. Service employees are frequently treated as being utterly replaceable; in fact the chain retail store where I worked as a manager had a section in the handbook that specifically advised managers to remind employees that they could be easily replaced, in order to keep them in line.

That’s a management technique (and a pretty lame one, IMO), that has no bearing on whether or not they ARE easily replaced. Being “treated” as though you are replaceable doesn’t mean you are, and the very best way not to be replaced is to make yourself not easily replaceable.

At this chain retail store you worked at where the handbook gave this management advice, were people often fired for no apparent reason?

[Gorsnak]

@Otto

I looked into it a couple years back but didn’t at that time score enough points on the entrance exam. IIRC you have to score a 71 or above to be considered and I scored an ironic 69. If only I’d paid better attention in French class!

Just marry a nice Canadian boy.

[sugar_and_spice]

@levdrakon

True, I’m talking about a specific form of employment protection but “at will” laws give employers an easy out. As long as they can fire for “no reason” they can also fire in bad faith or with malice.

Well, if an employer doesn’t provide a reason, then they can open themselves up to a discrimination lawsuit. But then its the employee who has to prove discrimination, so fair point.

[Miller]

@sugar and spice

Well, if an employer doesn’t provide a reason, then they can open themselves up to a discrimination lawsuit.

No, they don’t. That’s the entire point of “at will” employment.

[JRDelirious]

@Miller

No, they don’t. That’s the entire point of “at will” employment.

Still, it doesn’t prevent the employee from claiming in a lawsuit that the employer is lying and there WAS a “real reason” behind the termination and it was wrongful… IF he has the evidence.

[Cisco]

@JRDelirious

Still, it doesn’t prevent the employee from claiming in a lawsuit that the employer is lying and there WAS a “real reason” behind the termination and it was wrongful… IF he has the evidence.

Virtually impossible to prove. I served on a jury in a similar case so I can repeat from a standpoint of experience: virtually impossible to prove.

[Otto]

@Gorsnak

Just marry a nice Canadian boy.

Is that a proposal?

[levdrakon]

@JRDelirious

Still, it doesn’t prevent the employee from claiming in a lawsuit that the employer is lying and there WAS a “real reason” behind the termination and it was wrongful… IF he has the evidence.

Yeah, but most people don’t have evidence. You and everyone else in the business can “know” why you were fired but rarely can you really prove it. In an “at will” locale no lawyer is going to take the case unless you personally can finance it and I’d wager most people can’t afford a quality lawyer on their own, particularly when you’re pretty much living paycheck to paycheck and you’ve just had your livelihood yanked out from under you.

[Muffin]

@Otto

I looked into it a couple years back but didn’t at that time score enough points on the entrance exam. IIRC you have to score a 71 or above to be considered and I scored an ironic 69. If only I’d paid better attention in French class!

Sorry to hear that.

[JRDelirious]

@levdrakon

Yeah, but most people don’t have evidence.

Oh, absolutely – don’t think for a moment I’m ignoring the colossally asymmetric power position of the employee v. the employer. Which is why I’m partial to a “modified at-will” model in which termination “just because” MUST carry with it a proper severance compensation.

Ideally, I would ban employer reprisal for lawful conduct or expressions outside of and unrelated to the workplace (e.g. the employee has a bumper sticker reading: “Bush - War Criminal”; or, being gay ) as beyond the pale. But that would just be my preference, it’s not the Law.

[levdrakon]

@JRDelirious

Oh, absolutely – don’t think for a moment I’m ignoring the colossally asymmetric power position of the employee v. the employer. Which is why I’m partial to a “modified at-will” model in which termination “just because” MUST carry with it a proper severance compensation.

Ideally, I would ban employer reprisal for lawful conduct or expressions outside of and unrelated to the workplace (e.g. the employee has a bumper sticker reading: “Bush - War Criminal”; or, being gay ) as beyond the pale. But that would just be my preference, it’s not the Law.

Funny you should mention that. I got fired twice. Once was working for a non-profit organization and the supervisor didn’t like me. Everyone else did, that’s how I got the job. They all liked me. But not her, for some reason. So, she liked to frequently rearrange the office. Except the part she mostly liked to rearrange was the part with my desk in it. So, she waited for the director (who liked me but was kinda getting up there in years) was out of town on business and decided once again to spend the day rearranging the office. My part of the office. “I like your desk this way. No I liked it better the other way. No, let’s try it over here.” Of course, moving heavy desks and file cabinets was not part of my job description, but we have to be team players, don’t we? I ended up slamming my knee into the corner of a metal desk pretty hard. It really hurt, I was pissed, so I went to HR and said I wanted to file a report. If it’s not a permanent injury, no biggie. But I wanted a record of it. She fired me the next morning, in retaliation for filing the work-related injury form thingie. I asked for a reason, and she was quite smug and obviously happy when she said “I don’t need to give you a reason.”

The other time I was working as a bartender for this guy. He had TVs around the bar, mostly for the customers to have something to stare at. During the day before we were open, he’d have the TVs on anyway. He had them on John Edwards (I think that’s his name). The guy who does cold readings of the audience, convincing them he’s channeling their dead relatives? I made the mistake of saying what a moronic show it was and what idiots the audience were. Oops. Turns out it was Employers favorite show, he totally believe every bit of it, as well as in ghosts, spirits, etc. Fired.

There are so many bullshit reasons people get fired, I really think employers should have to give you a reason, in writing. They’re free to lie if they want, but at least they have to lie on paper, with their signature on it.

[Emmy2635]

@levdrakon

Employers should be required to provide a reason for termination. If the reason is “I don’t like you anymore” and that’s legal, then so be it. But as the employee, I should be given a reason for my firing.

What I think people are missing here is that employment-at-will is a two-way street. As an employee, there is an enormous amount of freedom in being able to quit at any time, for any reason. Wouldn’t you resent a law that required you to truthfully explain your reason for resigning?

Also, for clarification, all states in the US, with the exception of Montana, are employment-at-will states.

[JRDelirious]

@Emmy2635

What I think people are missing here is that employment-at-will is a two-way street. As an employee, there is an enormous amount of freedom in being able to quit at any time, for any reason. Wouldn’t you resent a law that required you to truthfully explain your reason for resigning?

That presupposes that we could only resign for a “justified cause”.

Of course, we pinkos believe that the employee should be given more freedom than the employer, because the employee is the one in a weaker position and at greater risk from his own unemployment…

[levdrakon]

@Emmy2635

What I think people are missing here is that employment-at-will is a two-way street. As an employee, there is an enormous amount of freedom in being able to quit at any time, for any reason. Wouldn’t you resent a law that required you to truthfully explain your reason for resigning?

Also, for clarification, all states in the US, with the exception of Montana, are employment-at-will states.

Not at all. As has been pointed out, the relationship between employer and employee is an unequal one. But as an employee, I should have to give a reason for quitting and that reason can be anything. “I’ve found a better opportunity.” I’m not taking my employer’s livelihood away by doing this, even if it’s on a whim. I should normally give a two week’s notice and if I don’t then I’m not against employees suffering a penalty. For instance forfeiture of severance pay.

If I’m such an invaluable employee that my unexpected departure would devastate the business than I’d expect the business owner and I had negotiated some sort of employment contract which would negate at-will/non-at-will situations anyway.

But the average employee isn’t in a position to negotiate themselves a nice employment contract, while business has negotiated and made into law a nice, juicy employment contract for themselves called “at will.”