English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Doesn't this destroy years of civil rights work to protect people
on thier jobs who don't ave Unions?
Isn't it just a cop-out because government is back-logged on cases?
We need people on thie jobs, to relieve tax burden, and cut down on welfare and crime!

Anthony Silva
Great Legislator

2006-10-09 02:01:00 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

6 answers

The "At Will" is a two way street. You owe nothing to the employer either. There are other laws on the books that prevent your civil rights from being violated so I believe the AT Will laws should stay.

2006-10-09 02:06:15 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

People, especially unions, always talk about how easy it is to loose a job and for a company to fire someone.

Let me ask you this. Why would a company fire you if you are doing an excellent job?

You will always have some very small percentage of morons out there who fire people for no reason whatsoeve. You can not conedm the entire population because of a couple morons.

2006-10-09 02:43:45 · answer #2 · answered by Truth 2 · 0 0

Nothing in life is guaranteed, why should a job be any different. Without such laws you end up like the federal government, some employees do nothing, get paid and retire and never give back to the people who pay their salary.

2006-10-09 02:12:28 · answer #3 · answered by waggy_33 6 · 0 0

As a former small business owner, I shudder to think of the difficulty I would have had getting rid of a deadbeat if there was no "at will" law.

2006-10-09 02:09:57 · answer #4 · answered by mickeyg1958 4 · 1 0

What, then, would become of the worker's option to quit "at will"? I don't believe this is a bad thing, but it can be abused, just as any law can be abused. That's why you have to choose your company wisely.

2006-10-09 02:06:59 · answer #5 · answered by Milana P 5 · 1 0

the last i heard, an employer was the one paying the salaries, so he should have the right to decide who works for him, and who does not.

2006-10-09 02:48:02 · answer #6 · answered by grumpy 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers