Employment-at-will Doctrine
LEG 500 – Law, Ethics, and Corporate Governance
Introduction
The United States is amongst the countries where employment is principally at-will (Stone, 2007). Most countries throughout the world allow employers to dismiss employees for cause such as poor employee performance, misconduct, or following an economic necessity. This doctrine provides respect for freedom of contract and employer deference. At- will implies that an employer can end an employee any time for any given reason. This reason should be legal should not lead to incurring legal liability. Similarly, an employee is free to leave a job at any time for any or no reason with no adverse legal consequences. Further, it implies that an employer may alter the terms of the employment relationship without notice and with no consequences. An employer can alter wages, alter benefits, or reduce pay time off (Wall & Johnson, 2006).
Law Exceptions to the At-Will Presumption
The three typical law exceptions include public policy, implied contract as well as the implied a covenant of good faith. Public Policy Exception law of exception to the at-will presumption protects employees from adverse employment actions that violate public interests. Under the public policy exception, an employee is said to be wrongfully discharged if terminated against explicit, well-established public policy of the State. An example is that an employer may not terminate an employee for filing a workers’ compensation claim when injured while on duty, or for his refusal to break a law at the request of the employer (Muhl, 2001).
The second exception is the Implied Contract exception. This contract may get created in several different ways. One is an oral assurance by a supervisor or employer’s representative. For instance, “We need you here, you have secured job for life!” or “We do not fire employees without offering them a chance for correction of misbehavior”. This two may give rise to an implied contract. Similarly, the employer’s handbooks, policies, and other documented assurances can make an implied contract (Muhl, 2001).
Third is the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Judicial interpretations of this covenant vary from requiring a just cause following a termination to forbidding terminations in bad faith or those prompted by malice. Such include firing an old employee to avoid paying retirement benefits. Another example is the termination of a salesperson just before a better commission is payable (Muhl, 2001).
Six cases have gotten provided, out of which I chose to evaluate case 2, case 5 and case 6 with reference to the employer/employee and will doctrine. Here I pay more attention to the three exemptions stated.
In case 2, we have Ellen opening a blog to protest CEO’s bonus. It gets explained that the company has not cared to raise the salaries of employees (except the directors) for two. In the blog, Ellen portrays the bosses as a know-nothings and out-of-touch. A profound reference to the employer at will doctrine, retaliation is an additional statute based amongst the doctrine’s presumptions. This provision prohibits employers from firing workers for engaging in necessary claims, particularly concerning overall compensation (e.g. duly salary increment, over-time, and discriminatory compensation) (Wall & Johnson, 2006). As can be seen, Ellen places a complaint on the blog claiming salary increase that has gotten surpassed in two years. The law requires employers to increase salaries of their workers, at least once every financial year (Stone, 2007). Another of Ellen’s claim is discrimination. Superiors are paying themselves bonuses at the expense of the employees, which is wrong. With reference to this, Ellen should not be fired. The only wrong committed is the use of vulgar language that may warrant a punishment and not a termination. The exception gets termed illegal discrimination that the employer has breached (Glenn, 2007).
Related Documents: Essay on Employment at will Doctrine
Summarize the employment-at-will doctrine discussed in the text and then evaluate three (3) of the six (6) scenarios described by determining: a. Whether you can legally fire the employee; include an assessment of any pertinent exceptions to the employment-at-will doctrine. b. The primary actions(s) that you should take to limit liability and impact on operations; specify the ethical theory that best supports your decision. According to the text the employment-at-will doctrine is a legal rule…
Employment-At-Will Doctrine Name: Strayer University Dr. William Stone LEG 500 Law, Ethics, and Corporate Governance May 14, 2015 Employment-At-Will First, I am grateful for the promotion to Chief Operating Officer! This day has been a long time waiting. Know that I will continue to do my best to build this prestigious corporation successfully. Successive to my promotion celebration, a number of concerns were articulated to me. Several issues need to be address immediately. I…
Assignment 1: Employment-At-Will Doctrine Ian Keller Strayer University Law, Ethics, and Corporate Governance LEG 500 Professor Joyce Weddle April 21st, 2013 Introduction Jennifer is a recent college graduate who has been hired by an accounting firm. In the short time she has been employed with the firm she has discovered a number of behaviors she feels could be inappropriate regarding the employment-at-will doctrine as well as some liabilities with the employer. She has brought this up only…
Assignment 1: Employment-At-Will Doctrine LEG 500: Law, Ethics, and Corporate Governance 10/29/2013 Employment-At-Will is a policy that most states in the United States conform to in terms of employment. “At-Will” is when an employer can end a relationship with an employee at any given time, for any reason with the exception of an illegal one, for no reason without having any legal liability…
At will employment: Do we live in an At-Will Employment world? The erosion of a doctrine Daniel Santacruz Business Law and Ethics Executive MBA Xavier University The at-will employment doctrine first materialized in the United States by means of an 1871 treatise authored by Horace Gray Wood. Although early American courts adopted the English common law approach that all hirings were presumed to last for one year, Wood, without basis, argued that…
Assignment 1: Employment-At-Will Doctrine Colleen Arnold Professor Annette E. Redmon Law, Ethics and Corporate Governance April, 23, 2014 1 Summarize the employment-at-will doctrine and evaluate each of the eight (8) scenarios described by determining: Whether you can legally fire the employee; include an assessment of any pertinent exceptions to the employment-at-will doctrine. b. What action you should take to limit liability and impact on operations;…
Employment at Will Doctrine By Candice S Spears For Professor Marlene Armstrong LEG 500 Law, Ethics, and Corporate Governance October 26, 2012 Introduction A person gets hired at a reputable firm. They are enjoying their job so far and everything is looking very promising. After reviewing the paperwork they have been given to sign, they notice verbiage about employment at will. This desirable job suddenly becomes something not so desirable. The employment at will doctrine…
Employment At-Will Employment-at-will is a legal rule, giving employers’ unfettered power to “dismiss their employees at will for good cause, no cause, or even for cause morally wrong, without being thereby guilty of a legal wrong.” (Halbert & Ingulli pg.49) In the first scenario where employee is unable to learn the computer applications that are basic to her job responsibilities and even after few months of training there is no change in productivity and is efficient to complete the required…
Employment-At-Will Case Case Example A: Elaine has sued Jerry because Jerry fired her. Elaine was on the job for two months.The job offer letter that Jerry had sent her mentioned the great career opportunities at the company and stated that her annual salary would be $30,000. The company is an employment‐at‐will employer. Elaine was given no reason for the termination. After the termination, Jerry hired a man named Kramer, who had less job experience and education than Elaine, for the position…
neonatal nurse employed by Employer. Employer accused her of wrongfully taking Employer’s property to another hospital, and they fired her. When Employee was interviewing for a new job, she was asked by the prospective employer the reason for her prior employment termination, and she revealed that she had been fired for theft. ISSUE: Whether Employee’s “compelled” repeating of Baptist’s defamatory reasons for termination satisfies the publication element of a defamation action. HOLDING: No. An employer should…