Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
United States

Journal pudge's Journal: Firing Without Cause 19

Journal by pudge

France makes me laugh. I think anyone should be able to be fired without cause. Period.

But then, I live in a free country.

This discussion was created by pudge (3605) for no Foes, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Firing Without Cause More

Firing Without Cause

Comments Filter:
  • To have otherwise is to impinge upon free association. Granted I would even go much further to the point of saying most equal oppertunity laws impinge on free association also.

    • The only exception would be people's right to make agreements by contract: if an employer and an employee come to an agreement of employment terms other than work at will, that's between them, and they have that right.

      And if employees want to band together and strike to get that right, that's their prerogative, providing they aren't violating any contract in doing so.

      And if employers want to fire the whole boatload and replace them for striking, that's also their prerogative, providing they aren't viola

      • Certainly, that all is fair by me. If you have a contract, the contract supercedes at-will employment, certainly you must follow through on the contract.

        If a company wants to hire outside union, that is their choice, as long as their contract with the union is followed.

        There is liberty, or should be, to associate with who you choose and avoid those you wish also.
  • I just knew this post was going to be about the "Shoot First" laws starting to crop up. :)

    I agree with the whole "Right to Hire/Fire" mentality, as long as there are provisions for a few extenuating circumstances. If you fire a girl because she won't sleep with you, then you'd at least better be able to make up another reason if challenged.

    • Why? I believe sexual matters should be a private matter between adults. (Assuming by "girl" you meant an adult woman, and not a minor.) If you've got a boss like that, go elsewhere. Or talk to his boss and get him fired.

      • Exactly, a private matter, not a business matter. So if that ends up being a factor, I think there should be something that could be done about it.

        • So if that ends up being a factor, I think there should be something that could be done about it.

          If there's something legal that can be done about it, it ceases to be a private matter. Passing a law about it would mean that in this democracy, "We the people" have just entered into two people's private relations. I don't have the right to do that, and if our representatives act in this way then they are not representing me and I fail to see whence they received that right.

          The idea that one is a busin

          • Well, as pudge pointed out, this falls under sexual harassment. Do you believe those laws should exist? If so, why would a person who is employed by someone have any less protection than a random person on the street? Other personal matters are my opinions of your color/religion/etc. If I base a hiring/firing/providing service decision on that basis, should it be legislated?

            • If so, why would a person who is employed by someone have any less protection than a random person on the street?

              Unless you have a contract (specific agreement) to the contrary, I fail to see why employment should confer special protection against mean words that wouldn't be available to the man on the street. I believe in your right to say mean and derogatory things to the (wo)man on the street or the person you hired, as well as that person's right to walk away. I think you're assuming everyone has

              • Okay, I can accept that. I just wanted to make sure you were consistent across the board. If you're coming from that perspective then it makes sense.

                And I wasn't saying anything about "universal working conditions," I was just seeing what you thought about sexual harassment in general. I take it you're not in favor of a law existing, for the workplace or any place. And that's cool, too.
          • If there's something legal that can be done about it, it ceases to be a private matter. Passing a law about it would mean that in this democracy, "We the people" have just entered into two people's private relations. I don't have the right to do that, and if our representatives act in this way then they are not representing me and I fail to see whence they received that right.

            You also do not have the right to tell your neighbors they cannot build a high-rise apartment next door to you, but your representati

            • And 99 percent of people would agree that they have that right.

              At one time they also agreed in one man's right to own another simply because of the ancestry of the latter.

              • No. Nothing close to 99 percent of the people ever agreed with slavery.

                But even if they did: so what? You really think slavery is analagous to zoning laws, in any way, apart from handwaving at some vague notion of "liberty"?

                You infringe on my liberty when you build a skyscraper next to my house. The right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins, and my nose includes the environment around my house.

                • But even if they did: so what? You really think slavery is analagous to zoning laws, in any way, apart from handwaving at some vague notion of "liberty"?

                  God.. zoning laws. Ack. I'm on my neighborhood's planning group now, because I applied the same logic that I do to voting.. can't complaing if you're not willing to do something about it.

                  It's really annoying sometimes though, especially related to zoning laws and owners that want to get waivers (mostly for condo conversions these days). There are so ma

    • Well ... in principle I disagree. You should be able to fire the girl. And you should receive huge fines (some of that money going to the girl) and perhaps jail time for the sexual harassment. Just because sexual harassment is illegal does not mean you shouldn't be able to fire someone for refusing your advances.

      Of course, sexual harassment is so hard to prove that if we don't make it illegal to fire someone for such a reason, then women will be more afraid to refuse unwanted advances. So in practice, m
      • So does that mean that in practice you agree? Do you agree with "illegally discriminatory reasons" in general, for more than just hiring/firing?
        • I agree in practice only as a temporary remedy to fight pervasive wrongdoing. I wish we could discriminate based on race in hiring, if we felt like it, because that's freedom. But because so much wrongdoing has been done against minorities and women, we need laws to protect them from discrimination, until such discrimination is no longer a significant problem. At that point that it no longer is, I would support repealing those laws.
          • I understand what you're saying, and to a point agree, but it is sort of an odd statement. Basically, "Until it's not an issue we need a law." We have laws because we have issues. Will people doing it being any more or less wrong after we repeal it? If you think it's wrong, we need a law. If you don't think it's wrong, then we don't.

            We could say the same thing for murder, if we want to be extreme. "Until people aren't killing other people we really need to have a law for it."

            And yes, I'm just being as
            • I understand what you're saying, and to a point agree, but it is sort of an odd statement. Basically, "Until it's not an issue we need a law." We have laws because we have issues.

              If we did not have a history of institutionalized subjugation of blacks and women, then we would not have most of the problems with racism and sexism we have today. These laws are part of the process of fixing those societal crimes.

              The law is no longer needed at the point the crimes of the past no longer significantly inform the a

Slashdot Top Deals

Your computer account is overdrawn. Please see Big Brother.

Close