Public Industries And Private Industries

However, the ruling in this case and others like it prove that employers can, in fact, be bound by articles written in an employee handbook when disciplining or discharging an employee. An abysmally written handbook can greatly jeopardize an employer’s right to terminate at will. Trends show that courts are increasingly acknowledging enforceable promises in the past employment practices of firms, in employer handbooks and in oral commitments. In addition to including an at-will disclaimer in employee handbooks, employers should also require employees to sign an acknowledgment confirming that they understand and agree to employment-at-will and that at-will employment can at any time be modified by a written agreement. Personnel manuals should explicitly state that the employer reserves the right to terminate employment at will. All written policies should also be free of any language that could be considered as a guarantee of job security. To be sure that these common pitfalls are avoided employers must retain the service of a labor attorney to draft and air-tight employee manual and acknowledgment

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,

The United States Supreme Court, as well as federal district and state courts, defines employee rights and an employer’s liability for employment law violations. Treatment on the job, including hiring, firing, and promotions, must be based on qualifications and merit and not on race, gender, age, sexual preference or how one responds to sexual advances. Yet despite these laws and policies, many employees continue to suffer from workplace harassment and employment discrimination.

The company has the right to terminate an employee as long as the termination does not discriminate or

One of the things everyone looks forward to is having security. However, the job market has not been strong enough to give job security. Since the Market crashed in 2008, there has been an increase in “at will” employees. At will employment means that the company or the firm has the right to terminate your employment at any given time for any reason with or without a legit cause. At will also give employees the flexibility to quit their job as they wish without giving any notice or reason. In “Employment at Will and Due Process” by Patricia A. Wethane and Tara J. Radin expresses their views on “At Will” employment. Radin and Werhane mention several views on ethical treatment of employees, in principle and in practice, against at will employment. In this article they believe it violates certain rights that employees have, it violates the principle of fairness, and there are certain legal objections.

The first issue to learn is the employment relationships are presumed to be “at-will” in all U.S. states except Montana. The U.S. is one of a handful of countries where employment is predominantly at-will. Most countries throughout the world allow employers to dismiss employees only for cause. The training should first define “At-Will”. According to (Pound, 2010),

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

Depending on the status of the employee upon hiring or later, he or she may be granted at a will contract or a property interest contract in a continued employment (Varone, 2012). Because at a will employees cannot expect a continued employment, they can be terminated for any reason or without reason (Varone, 2012). For property interest employees, due process must be provided before job termination stated Varone (2012). Public employees such as municipal and district firefighters even under at a will contract cannot be terminated without just cause or in a violation of law affirmed Varone (2012). A fire chief who was fired due to an alleged incompetence filed a law suit against his employer. The facts, the issues, the ruling, the rationale, a perspective, and example in which the court’s decision might be cited are addressed in this paper.

The National Conference of State Legislature, NCSL, defines at-will employment as, “a term used in U.S. labor law for contractual relationships in which an employee can be dismissed by an employer for any reason that is, without having to establish "just cause" for termination, and without warning.” In addition, the NCSL reports that all states with the exception of Montana are under the “at-will” stature in regards to employment. This doctrine poses various social problems, which include: job security, increased financial stress, and uncooperative work environments.

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 essence of the public-policy exception is that an employee will have a cognizable claim for wrongful discharge if the discharge of the employee contravenes a clear mandate of public policy. Claims for wrongful discharge under the public-policy exception have included termination of employees for: (1) refusal to participate in illegal activity, (2) the employee's refusal to forsake the performance of an important public duty or obligation, (3) the employee's refusal to forego the exercise of a job-related legal right or privilege, (4) the employee's "whistleblowing" activity or other

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

Sure hypothetically speaking we can say that by firing few employees he protected the jobs of other employees.But an employee working under the fear of losing his job is likely to work less efficiently. Employees nowadays represent a major part of the value of any company perhaps also customers (who rely upon the business for goods/services).They qualitatively contribute to the company as intellectual capital which is not auditable. In order to motivate people to work hard for the interests of the company, a level of trust must be built with them. Likewise it is important for trust to develop between the organization and its external environment (customers, suppliers, government, and interest groups). Such trust can only grow from the perceived security that the interests of all individuals and stakeholders are taken into account.

Retaliation is when the federal and/or state laws prohibit employers from firing employees in retaliation for engaging in legally proper, necessary, or desirable activities. A list of protected activities include argue of minimum wage or overtime pay, participating in union activities, refusing to do or agree with any discriminatory practices, claiming work compensation, and whistle-blowing. Whistle-blowing, the majority of the states offer whistleblower safety for the public employees. Unfortunately employment protection for employees from the private sector employees is very limited (NCSL, 2013).

When we examine public sector versus private sector, plenty of differences come to mind. In defining each, we learn a private sector in an economy consist of all businesses and firms owned by ordinary members of the general public. It also consists of all the private households in which people live. The public sector in an economy is owned and controlled by a government. It consist of government businesses and firms and goods and services provided by the government such as the national health service, state