Ethics of the At-Will Doctrine Have you ever wondered what the term "at-will employment" means? According to Cornell University Law School, the employment-at-will doctrine "refers to the presumption that employment is for an indefinite period of time and may be terminated either by employer or employee" (n.d., para. 1). This doctrine is said to level the playing field between employee and employer as each party can end their relationship at-will. At-will employment however is not equally applied between public and private business sectors, nor is it supported in every state within the United States. Employees who work for the public sector such as teachers or firefighters, or those working in California or Montana for example, can only be …show more content…
The employer generally invests time locating a candidate to hire, and resources for salary, benefits and training to ensure success for both the employee and the company. The employee can terminate his/her employment at any time, for any reason; thus, leaving the employer at a disadvantage. The employer has to recoup the company losses by again invest time and money to hire another employee with no guarantee that the new hire will stay any longer than the previous employee. Is this fair or ethical behavior toward the employer? Do employers ask that the employee reimburse them for the time and resources expended to hire a replacement? Should they? In an effort to create equity in risk and benefit between employee and employer, the at-will employment doctrine allows the employer to terminate an employee at any time, for any reason. But again, is this fair or ethical behavior towards the employee? Don 't businesses have a greater amount of power than an employee in determining work environment and pay scale? Is it ethical for an employer to take advantage of their employees and fire those who make a high salary and replace them with employees with a lower starting pay in order to save money or distribute bonuses to top executives? Cornell University Law School notes that "given the unequal bargaining power between employees and employers, critics of this doctrine have noted its overly harsh results and have looked to unions, acting as certified
Sadly, much of the nation still recognizes the antiquated 1877 At-Will-Employment Law is a law that allows an employer to
“The Verdict” is a movie that deals with medical and legal ethics. Frank Gavin is an alcoholic who hasn’t won any of his cases in the past three years. Mickey, his former partner, gives him a medical malpractice case that is sure to settle for a large amount of money. The case of Deborah Ann Kay, a mother who was given anesthetic when she had just eaten inhaled her vomit and is now in a coma. The Donaheys, her sister and brother in law are hoping for a good settlement and Frank assures them that they have a strong case. While the case is going on he meets Laura, a woman at a bar who he falls in love with. Frank goes to visit Deborah Ann Kay in the hospital and is affected by her condition. He meets with the defendants who run the
Employment at will refers to employment practices that allow the employer and employees to terminate their employment at any given time. Company’s therefore can terminate an employee’s employment at any time for whatever reason or no reason at all. Richard Epstein favors employment at will and advocates for the principle. Epstein argues the proprietary rights, that employers have right to spend their money the way that they want. This means they have all control and decision making when exchanging money for certain labor. Epstein also mentions how employment of will acts as a freedom. For example, At will employment allows employees to freely choose to quit their job whenever they want as well as employers get to fire at anytime, therefore
KSM is a mastermind terrorist who has been captured by the CIA. He refuses to reveal any information about his organization or the members thereof that could be fundamental to the welfare of hundreds of lives. Even under the presence of coercive methods such as sleep deprivation and water boarding, he has refused to talk. His nine and eleven year old children have been brought into custody and a suggestion has been made to torture the children. Is the option ethical or moral in any sense? Utilitarianism provides two answers for the question; one asserting the general rule of utility, the other expanding on
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
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,
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
The employment at will doctrine is a very interesting doctrine. According to it, employers can fire employees for good, bad or no cause at all. Employees need to pay close attention to the doctrine under which their employment contract was offered or signed. A good example of this is the case of Waddell v. Boyce Thompson Institute for Plant Research, Inc.
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
Based on facts and legal laws, the judge can look over the evidence and rules and make a decision. The employment-at-will doctrine clearly states that the employer can fire the employee at any time for any reason. There are many exceptions to the employment-at-will
Employment at will is essentially a rule that strips employees and employers from their rights to due process when it comes to workplace termination. Under this principle employers may let any person go for any reason at any time during their employment with or without just cause. Your stature at the company, time worked, personal conduct; none of those things have to be taken into consideration if you are let go. This means that if an employee does not agree with their grounds for termination, they have no legal right to fight it in a court of law. Employment at will also allows employees to quit their job at any time, again regardless of having just reasoning or not. The only case where an employment at will principle would not apply is if an employee, when hired, signed a document that stipulates other specific terms and conditions regarding grounds for termination/quitting. An important thing to make note of is just as if an employee had signed a contract, they are made aware before being brought on full time, that they are an “at will” employee. These soon to be employees are voluntarily signing that they abide by what is defined in the employment at will principle.
In the world, it is hard to sometimes hard to balance life between things that don’t involve work and things that involve your work. At-Will Employment is a contractual relationship between an employee and an employer that allows dismissal for any reason without just cause. The idea of at-will employment originated in 1877 with Horace Gray Wood. Horace Gray Wood dealt with master and slave relations. The question with at-will employment becomes is it ethical to let an employee go based on non-work difficulties. The ethical decision that is being examined is “Is it ethical for a manager to terminate an employee whose performance has markedly declined non account of dealing with non-work personal difficulties?” The at-will doctrine is
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).