Glock Talk

Glock Talk (http://glocktalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Okie Corral (http://glocktalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=29)
-   -   'At Will' employment, what are your thoughts? (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1452154)

Slug71 11-08-2012 21:13

'At Will' employment, what are your thoughts?
 
I know it has it's benefits like being able to quit. But do you think that it should be revised so that employers can't terminate without reason or warning?

With the way the economy is, I think employees should at least be given a verbal and/or written warning before being terminated and have the chance to 'fix' whatever the issue may be.

Seems there's so much talk about getting people back to work and creating job but what about keeping people at work?

gjk5 11-08-2012 21:15

No.

An employer should be able to terminate an employee at will. And honestly I think if it is a truly privately owned company then they should be able to do so for ANY reason they want with NO notice.

CAcop 11-08-2012 21:16

What few people realize is that "at will" has its limitations.

Annhl8rX 11-08-2012 21:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by gjk5 (Post 19610747)
No.

An employer should be able to terminate an employee at will. And honestly I think if it is a truly privately owned company then they should be able to do so for ANY reason they want with NO notice.

I agree completely. Unfortunately, unions and lawsuits have made it so that employers almost need a court order to fire someone. That keeps a lot of people in jobs they shouldn't be doing.

jame 11-08-2012 21:20

"At will" works fine here.

Employees and employers both have the right to terminate a contract of employment for any reason.

Why would it be a problem?

Dan_ntx 11-08-2012 21:26

Texas is an "at will" state, and rarely are people fired for no real reason as many fear when discussing this topic. Most companies have policies that go beyond what the state requires, and it is largely a non-issue. It's a good example of competition in the marketplace. Nobody wants to work for a company that mistreats its employees, so to attract and retain quality workers companies have established a culture of "we treat our people great" and it has benefitted workers. Personally I can tell you that the company I work for requires incredibly stupid behavior to be fired.

Slug71 11-08-2012 21:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Annhl8rX (Post 19610754)
I agree completely. Unfortunately, unions and lawsuits have made it so that employers almost need a court order to fire someone. That keeps a lot of people in jobs they shouldn't be doing.

Maybe where you are. I was just fired recently with no reason and had no prior warnings.

Bill Keith 11-08-2012 21:29

"AT Will" is code language for screw the employee, don't like what the boss dictates - take a hike.:whistling:

Slug71 11-08-2012 21:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Keith (Post 19610791)
"AT Will" is code language for screw the employee, don't like what the boss dictates - take a hike.:whistling:

Pretty much. And more people just end up on welfare.

Andy123 11-08-2012 21:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by CAcop (Post 19610750)
What few people realize is that "at will" has its limitations.

In many states, those limitations are few and narrow.

Annhl8rX 11-08-2012 21:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slug71 (Post 19610790)
Maybe where you are. I was just fired recently with no reason and had no prior warnings.

I hate to hear that happened to you. I guess I was a bit too general there. Small companies typically can truly operate on an "at will" basis. Larger companies and government entities, though, usually have policies that keep worthless employees at work.

Slug71 11-08-2012 21:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by CAcop (Post 19610750)
What few people realize is that "at will" has its limitations.

Pretty much zero limitations in Oregon.

droidfire 11-08-2012 21:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by jame (Post 19610762)
"At will" works fine here.

Employees and employers both have the right to terminate a contract of employment for any reason.

Why would it be a problem?

Because it's a fair deal and some people just want to have the deck stacked in their favor.

As if it isn't already hard enough to replace people hindering or flat out preventing the success of the business, someone comes along and tries to make companies more wary of hiring people.

If the OP got what he wanted and shafted businesses like that, you'd see an immediate decline in job openings being filled, more stringent background checks, and a very heavy burden placed on job hunters to convince a business to put them on the payroll.

Think it's hard for people to find work now?

It really isn't, honestly, but make this happen and good luck getting a new job.

jame 11-08-2012 21:34

"At Will" is actually code language for "competition".

Good employees are in demand, so employers do not want the reputation of being a haphazard workplace that's not a stable workplace.

It creates good places to work. It also creates good employees.

ChuteTheMall 11-08-2012 21:35

The better employees thrive under at-will conditions.:cool:

CAcop 11-08-2012 21:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy123 (Post 19610798)
In many states, those limitations are few and narrow.

Where there is a lawyer, there is a way.

Slug71 11-08-2012 21:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Annhl8rX (Post 19610804)
I hate to hear that happened to you. I guess I was a bit too general there. Small companies typically can truly operate on an "at will" basis. Larger companies and government entities, though, usually have policies that keep worthless employees at work.

No worries man. I understood what you meant.
But yeh thats why I said it has it's benefits. I just think at least one warning should be required.
What pisses me off most is that I worked with a couple of really useless people but they were protected by the union.
Management knew they were useless and have been trying to get rid of them.
I do everything right, not union and bam. Because one manager doesn't like me.

Ruggles 11-08-2012 21:42

I supervise a good number of people at work. I am always and I mean always short staffed it seems. Makes no business for me to fire anyone if I did not have a just cause. It hurts my ability to perform when I fire someone, it takes minutes to lose someone and weeks to replace.

So in my case I think no regulation is needed, the free market takes care of the issue.

Slug71 11-08-2012 21:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by droidfire (Post 19610810)
Because it's a fair deal and some people just want to have the deck stacked in their favor.

As if it isn't already hard enough to replace people hindering or flat out preventing the success of the business, someone comes along and tries to make companies more wary of hiring people.

If the OP got what he wanted and shafted businesses like that, you'd see an immediate decline in job openings being filled, more stringent background checks, and a very heavy burden placed on job hunters to convince a business to put them on the payroll.

Think it's hard for people to find work now?

It really isn't, honestly, but make this happen and good luck getting a new job.

Wow! You don't even know me and saying I shafted the business?

I really busted my ass trying to get ahead after my divorce. I had plans to move next year and get a temp job while I get things in order to start my own business. Everything seemed to be falling in place and bam, I GOT SHAFTED.

427 11-08-2012 21:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slug71 (Post 19610790)
Maybe where you are. I was just fired recently with no reason and had no prior warnings.

Sorry to hear about this, but welcome to the real world. BTDT.

Slug71 11-08-2012 21:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by 427 (Post 19610874)
Welcome to the real world.

In America.

Cali-Glock 11-08-2012 21:51

If not at will the what? Some socialist utopia where my boss keeps paying me when I no longer serve a viable positive purpose for the organization?

No thanks.

Cali-Glock 11-08-2012 21:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruggles (Post 19610847)
I supervise a good number of people at work. I am always and I mean always short staffed it seems. Makes no business for me to fire anyone if I did not have a just cause. It hurts my ability to perform when I fire someone, it takes minutes to lose someone and weeks to replace.

So in my case I think no regulation is needed, the free market takes care of the issue.

This!!

The problem is not firing good people, but rather the problem is keeping bad employees because you can't afford to fire anyone and despite this economy you can't find good employees.

427 11-08-2012 21:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slug71 (Post 19610877)
In America.

My last employer was "right-sizing". I got laid off without the same notice month's notice that another employee received. I wasn't part of the click. I'm in an at will state.

Ruggles 11-08-2012 21:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slug71 (Post 19610790)
Maybe where you are. I was just fired recently with no reason and had no prior warnings.

Fired or laid off?

No offense but why would they fire you for no reason? What did they gain?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:29.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2013, Glock Talk, All Rights Reserved.