Ethical Boundaries On Employers ' Exercise Of Its Legal Rights

An “at will” employee is an employee who agreed to a contract in which they can be fired at any time, for almost any reason. The law generally presumes that employees are employed at will unless they can prove otherwise.

The employment At-Will doctrine is in place to allow employment relationships to be restricted. It allows employers and employees to terminate a relationship at any time without cause. The doctrine will allow employees to quit without any fear of being held liable for any inconvenience or disruption to the business at the time of quitting. This doctrine also allows employers to make any changes towards an employee’s term of employment (N, 2017). However, some exceptions could prevent an employee to make those changes if the employee is covered in that particular area. Doyle A

In dealing with a person’s livelihood, and often, sense of self, it is of no surprise that ethical issues regarding employment practices are of great concern. The issues of employment at will and due process contracts in the workplace are among the most widely contentious in the realm of employment. Employment at will is the doctrine that employment may be ended, by either party, for good, bad or no cause at all.1 Due process, on the other hand, is the employment practice in which a person may appeal a decision as a means of receiving an explanation and the opportunity to argue against it.2 Employment at will is the standard in the majority of private corporations today and is argued for relentlessly by freedom of contract enthusiasts,

"Labor Code section 2922, which provides that an employment relationship of unspecified duration may be terminated at the will of either party, establishes a presumption of at-will employment. This presumption may be overcome by evidence of an implied agreement that the employment would continue indefinitely, pending the occurrence of some event such as the employer 's dissatisfaction with the employee 's services or the existence of a cause for termination. (Foley v. Interactive Data Corp. (1988) 47 Cal.3d 654, 680, 254 Cal.Rptr. 211, 765 P.2d 373.) `[Factors apart from consideration and express terms may be used to ascertain the existence and content of an employment agreement, including the personnel policies or practices of the employer, the employee 's longevity of service, actions or communications by the employer reflecting assurances of continued employment, and the practices of the industry in which the employee is engaged. ' [Citation.]" (Soules v. Cadam, Inc. (1991) 2

Employment-at-will Doctrine is legal rule, which gives employers broad discretion to fire employees “for a good reason, a bad reason, or no reason at all” (Halbert, Ingulli, & Frey, 2015). The meaning of the term at-will lay in the will of employer to dismiss an employee at any time for any reason. From the other side an employee can feel free to leave a work at any time, without reason, and it will not have any unfavorable legal outcomes. Under at-will employer has right to make changes in the employment relationship agreement without any notification. Such changes can be applied to reduction of benefits, rate of wages or alteration in schedule of work. Employment-at-will may put employees in a vulnerable position. Under at-will conditions, employer has rights to dismiss employee with or without any reason. Such dismissal is limiting employee 's legal rights to dispute termination.

In a wrongful termination case, the terminated employee must prove more than having been treated unfairly, s/he must be able to prove one or more of his/her legal rights were violated” (Wrongful Termination Website, 2011). Employees in many states are at a disadvantage, possessing few rights, because of the employment at will rule, meaning employers can fire employees at any time and for no reason at all, just like employees can quit any time and for any reason. This makes the definition of wrongful termination extremely narrow.

A wrongful discharge case is a major exception to at-will employment. There is a Common Law of the exceptions to a wrongful discharge case to At-Will Doctrine includes terminations that violate state policy. It also includes termination after the creation of an implied contract of employment. Furthermore, termination of service in violation of an implied covenant involves good faith and fair dealing. Moreover, unlawful termination includes termination that violates federal, local, or local laws to combat discrimination.

When we are dealing with the employment relationship between employers and employees, ethical issues are most likely to emerge. Especially, if a manager fires a worker without a proper reason, critics will follow this employer’s behavior. In Patricia Werhane’s paper, “Employment at Will and Due Process”, discusses two doctrines which are Employment at Will (EAW) and Due Process. It also addresses some justifications and objections for EAW, and shows Werhane’s supportive view to Due Process. In contrast, EAW is defended by Richard Epstein in his article “In Defense of the Contract at Will”. In my paper, I will attempt to develop my argument in favor of Employment at Will that could improve flexibility and efficiency of

“At- Will means that an employer can terminate an employee at any time for any reason, expect an illegal one, or for no reason without incurring legal liability” (At-Will Employment). It crazy to think that every state expect Montana is at will and that US is one of a few countries where employment is at will. We work so hard in American and yet no job security unless we are in a union. At will mean employers can change your contract with no notice or consequences. In the article What Do Employment At will mean it states “Employers are also not required to provide notice or explanation when terminating an at-will employee and the court would deny any claim attempting to seek benefits for losses as a result of termination (Doyle). These employees were not fired due to race, color, religion, sex, disability, age or sexual orientation. So even though it was wrong and not fair that they were fired. It still wasn’t illegal and it doesn’t qualify as exceptions to the at will

The ruling of this case shows that employees need to pay close attention to their employment contracts. They need to fully understand the implications or effects of the employment at will doctrine before signing the offer

Employment at will is a law that is present in all fifty states in the US; although, in Montana there requires a stated cause for termination. Employment at will creates dissent among employees when they have been terminated for a cause that is thought to be unsubstantial or when no cause is given. There are pros and cons to the presumption, and employees and employers have different views. Employment at will means that the employer can terminate an employee at any time, for any cause without warning. However, even an at-will employee cannot be terminated because of discriminatory reasons. Employment at will also means that an employee can leave a job at any time without the fear of facing any legal consequences. An employer can also

The Blue Steel Mfg. Co. is dedicated to treating all employees with dignity and respect, and to meet or exceed the standards set out by the Employment Standards Act when it is necessary to terminate employment. (The Province of Ontario, 2014) The purpose of this policy is to provide fair and consistent treatment to all employees with regard to termination of employment. (The University of Montana Western, 2008)

Warhane and Radin, in their article “Employment at Will and Due Process”, suggest that one of the major reasons employment at will is acceptable is that it protects the proprietary rights of employers. In particular “the proprietary rights of employers guarantee that they may employ or dismiss

Techniques were established to assist employees with policies that could amend wrongfully discharging claims and unreasonable terminations by employers. Zachary described how ‘at will employment policy’ can be challenged if the employee can prove termination was unjustly enforced. The author studies employees who work at the will of the employer and the employers terminate the employees for unjust reasons; the ‘at will employment policy’ could be a shield of

Employment-at-will has been an established segment of common law in the United States, which states that either party to