The question I have about people who are against at will is the flip side, which is being locked into a hellish job for some set period. I have had jobs that deteriorated my mental health. With at will I can just walk out the door whenever I want. Not so if both employer and employee are bound by some cool down counter clause.
Even without abuse there is opportunity cost to staying at your company. I’ve seen family members on the spot quit to care for people they cared about, but not people anyone would consider close enough to be covered by anything like FMLA, like your best friend’s child. I quit jobs that interfered with my college education.
It sucks to be let go, but I don’t think people consider if it might make more suffering yo be forced to stay. I can’t see a situation where companies have to give notice, but employees don’t. Sure I guess employees can sabotage their workplaces to be sent home with pay, but what a fantastic way to catch a charge and screw yourself over forever.
Are you saying that in countries where employers can’t just make up reasons to divest themselves of employees without repercussion or paying unemployment that the employees themselves are somehow bound to their employer and can’t just walk out?
Unless you’re under some contract, I don’t see how that would be enforced other than having laws on the books in individual countries about a minimum required notice.
Even if a country DOES have laws on the books stating all employees in all full time jobs must provide x weeks of notice before quitting, if the same country has a bunch more clauses to protect employees from employers than the U.S. currently does I have to imagine there are protections in place for the employees in cases of hostile work environments or whatever.
I can’t see a situation where a country that protects employees from the sort of hostile, predatory, dehumanizing behavior we see carried out consistently by U.S. companies wouldn’t have continued to take said employees into account while also protecting their country’s employers from things like large scale business-wide walkouts or whatnot.
I obviously don’t know for sure, but I do see stories from people from those nations talking about how they have to say for whatever amount of time for a notice period. This is the thing where I have questions about abuse. I’m not saying at will is great, but I also don’t think it’s 100% awful and I think people should consider what it would be like to not be able to leave a job when you want to.
The “cool down” period in many cases is just a few days when it’s the employee resigning. If your job sucks so much that you can’t stomach being at it for another week, you’ve got other problems.
That’s kind of my point? That some workplaces are toxic or you otherwise need to abandon your job because of external reasons. Maybe it’s just because I’m older (mid-30s), but I don’t know a single person who hasn’t run into a fuck this job moment for whatever reason. Either because it was deteriorating their mental health, or they prioritized their personal life. My life fell into a coma and I literally got on a plane thr moment I knew. I told my boss I wouldn’t be in and he could fire me or not, I don’t care. My brother had no one in that moment. I was lucky my bosses allowed me to keep my job while I acted as his advocate to get him care until the rest of my family could get there, but what if I wasn’t allowed because of some BS notice contract? Which at will I can just quit fuck it. With no at-will there would definitely be some punishment. This scenario may not overcome the good of getting ride of at will, but I think people should consider it. Consider what it would be like to trapped in a place you hate with a hostile work environment.
Lol we’ve got protections for all those cases which mean that you don’t have to lose your job because of temporary issues. Also if the circumstances at your workplace are serious enough you can resign with just cause without any notice period.
What’s more, if you have left over PTO, when terminating your contract there are two options: either the your employer pays you for the PTO you haven’t used, or you use it. In my case for example I have enough PTO saved to cover the notice period.
I don’t know about the rest of the EU, but in my country the employee can ALWAYS walk out, they just lose the pay for the non-worked days.
In practice, employment contracts are always good for employees and usually bad for employers. You don’t want to be locked into a job? Then don’t sign a contract that locks you in. Just refuse, as just about any sane person would.
Employers WOULD refuse to be locked in, except sane governments force them to. Sane governments do not force regular citizens into indentured servitude.
That’s why I brought up a restructuring. The ability to quit whenever should always be an option but being fired without notice for anything that isn’t just gross incompetence/negligence should not. I should be able to quit because my manager pissed me off. I shouldn’t get fired because I pissed the manager off.
It’s not that I disagree, it’s just that I can never see a scenario where both sides don’t have the same power. If you can quit at any time, then rhe employer can fire at any time. If you the employer has you give notice, so do you. I’ve never hear any stories online in different countries of the notice period not being both ways. And despite what one dude said to me sometimes weeks long, not a week. That would be actual hell.
The difference is the employer has inherent power by being a money providing service as well as providing whatever other service/product they provide.
When you employ that many people the power naturally rises to the top. That’s why we need legislature to prevent that massive gap in power. Of course no one at the top will support this but the needs of the many outweigh the few regardless of how much money they have.
Remember corporate bailouts? “wE bAiLeD tHeM oUt BeCaUsE tHeY pRoViDe JoBs!!!”
The question I have about people who are against at will is the flip side, which is being locked into a hellish job for some set period. I have had jobs that deteriorated my mental health. With at will I can just walk out the door whenever I want. Not so if both employer and employee are bound by some cool down counter clause.
Even without abuse there is opportunity cost to staying at your company. I’ve seen family members on the spot quit to care for people they cared about, but not people anyone would consider close enough to be covered by anything like FMLA, like your best friend’s child. I quit jobs that interfered with my college education.
It sucks to be let go, but I don’t think people consider if it might make more suffering yo be forced to stay. I can’t see a situation where companies have to give notice, but employees don’t. Sure I guess employees can sabotage their workplaces to be sent home with pay, but what a fantastic way to catch a charge and screw yourself over forever.
It’s food for thought.
Are you saying that in countries where employers can’t just make up reasons to divest themselves of employees without repercussion or paying unemployment that the employees themselves are somehow bound to their employer and can’t just walk out?
Unless you’re under some contract, I don’t see how that would be enforced other than having laws on the books in individual countries about a minimum required notice.
Even if a country DOES have laws on the books stating all employees in all full time jobs must provide x weeks of notice before quitting, if the same country has a bunch more clauses to protect employees from employers than the U.S. currently does I have to imagine there are protections in place for the employees in cases of hostile work environments or whatever.
I can’t see a situation where a country that protects employees from the sort of hostile, predatory, dehumanizing behavior we see carried out consistently by U.S. companies wouldn’t have continued to take said employees into account while also protecting their country’s employers from things like large scale business-wide walkouts or whatnot.
I obviously don’t know for sure, but I do see stories from people from those nations talking about how they have to say for whatever amount of time for a notice period. This is the thing where I have questions about abuse. I’m not saying at will is great, but I also don’t think it’s 100% awful and I think people should consider what it would be like to not be able to leave a job when you want to.
The “cool down” period in many cases is just a few days when it’s the employee resigning. If your job sucks so much that you can’t stomach being at it for another week, you’ve got other problems.
That’s kind of my point? That some workplaces are toxic or you otherwise need to abandon your job because of external reasons. Maybe it’s just because I’m older (mid-30s), but I don’t know a single person who hasn’t run into a fuck this job moment for whatever reason. Either because it was deteriorating their mental health, or they prioritized their personal life. My life fell into a coma and I literally got on a plane thr moment I knew. I told my boss I wouldn’t be in and he could fire me or not, I don’t care. My brother had no one in that moment. I was lucky my bosses allowed me to keep my job while I acted as his advocate to get him care until the rest of my family could get there, but what if I wasn’t allowed because of some BS notice contract? Which at will I can just quit fuck it. With no at-will there would definitely be some punishment. This scenario may not overcome the good of getting ride of at will, but I think people should consider it. Consider what it would be like to trapped in a place you hate with a hostile work environment.
Lol we’ve got protections for all those cases which mean that you don’t have to lose your job because of temporary issues. Also if the circumstances at your workplace are serious enough you can resign with just cause without any notice period.
What’s more, if you have left over PTO, when terminating your contract there are two options: either the your employer pays you for the PTO you haven’t used, or you use it. In my case for example I have enough PTO saved to cover the notice period.
I don’t know about the rest of the EU, but in my country the employee can ALWAYS walk out, they just lose the pay for the non-worked days.
In practice, employment contracts are always good for employees and usually bad for employers. You don’t want to be locked into a job? Then don’t sign a contract that locks you in. Just refuse, as just about any sane person would.
Employers WOULD refuse to be locked in, except sane governments force them to. Sane governments do not force regular citizens into indentured servitude.
That’s why I brought up a restructuring. The ability to quit whenever should always be an option but being fired without notice for anything that isn’t just gross incompetence/negligence should not. I should be able to quit because my manager pissed me off. I shouldn’t get fired because I pissed the manager off.
It’s not that I disagree, it’s just that I can never see a scenario where both sides don’t have the same power. If you can quit at any time, then rhe employer can fire at any time. If you the employer has you give notice, so do you. I’ve never hear any stories online in different countries of the notice period not being both ways. And despite what one dude said to me sometimes weeks long, not a week. That would be actual hell.
The difference is the employer has inherent power by being a money providing service as well as providing whatever other service/product they provide.
When you employ that many people the power naturally rises to the top. That’s why we need legislature to prevent that massive gap in power. Of course no one at the top will support this but the needs of the many outweigh the few regardless of how much money they have.
Remember corporate bailouts? “wE bAiLeD tHeM oUt BeCaUsE tHeY pRoViDe JoBs!!!”
Then there were mass layoffs.