at-will employment

[theretoo]

is anyone confused about the 'at-will' statements that employer's make these days...
i have personally encountered it several times with employers and managers who seem to think that 'at-will' gives them carte blanc to do whatever it is they want to do..to help clear up some confusion on this issue-

'at-will' employment means that an employer can 'fire' you for whatever reason they want, yes, that is part of it...now the other part that they seem to forget is this

...as long as it is not illegal
....it also means that an employee can walk off the job at any time without notice
....an employee is employed 'at their will' to provide their services for that company
....if 'that' company does not meet the employee's expectations at any time, then the employee is under no obligation to continue to provide their services to said company and can leave at any given moment, without notice

 

[jacksgal]

If you walk off your job (as you did) your employer has grounds to fire you and contest any unemployment claim. Yes you ar enot required to give notice when you resign its always helpful to the employee to do so for references, but its not mandatory unless there is a employment contract that states otherwise

 

[Green_Hornet]

Today the employer's unbridled freedom to fire an employee without cause and without incurring civil liability no longer exists in many parts of the country. Calling the at-will doctrine the default rule is "misleading."

While "at-will" employment used to mean a worker could be terminated for any reason at all, in the past 20 years, Congress and state legislatures have passed so many statutes barring discriminatory discharge, based on age, race, jury duty, whistleblowing, disability, family leave and others. The doctrine no longer carries the same meaning. In fact, the at-will doctrine as it existed is dead.

In fact many courts now refuse to adhere to the traditional view, finding little to recommend its continued application in a modern society, particularly where the circumstances of the discharge contravene a clearly mandated public policy or where the employer is motivated by bad faith or malice.

There are mediocre employers and mediocre H.R generalist (usually out of work themselves or temps) that refuse to except it, they don't recognize that the exceptions dwarf the rule,and "at-will" no longer means "at-whim" making them 20 to 30 years behind the times in labor management relations.

 

[jacksgal]

theretoo's problem does not really fall into any of those protected classes or issues. Although he/she does assume his/her faith might play role in this. Problem is that theretoo walked off job!

 

[Green_Hornet]

The post is not discussing theretoo's problem (whatever that is) it is a general post on the "at-will" presumption.

 

[jacksgal]

Its very easy to presume that theretoo is asking this because at will was brought up in his/her other thread. Which is why I made statement I did.

 

[theretoo]

theretoo's problem does not really fall into any of those protected classes or issues. Although he/she does assume his/her faith might play role in this. Problem is that theretoo walked off job!

i have no faith, where did you ever get that idea

 

[jacksgal]

I said you feel your faith played role in your boss's actions.

 

[theretoo]

I said you feel your faith played role in your boss's actions.

i have no faith....i did comment on another poster's question regarding their faith, but that was not my experience....the other poster mentioned that they were a jw....i don't claim to be part of any particular faith

 

[jacksgal]

Ok my bad sorry

 

[jacksgal]

I certainly dont see "at will" as dead! Its been updated to make it fair. At will still exist and employers are still allowed to fire anyone at anytime with or without warning or cause save for examples given by Green Hornet or if the firing violates other laws or CBA's and employment contracts