danielpalos
Diamond Member
- Jan 24, 2015
- 73,961
- 5,055
it is irrelevant to employment at the will of either party.compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment. under Capitalism, only Capital has to circulate not labor. solving for simple poverty means a more efficient positive multiplier effect for our economy. your "for-cause criteria are irrelevant and have no standing in our at-will employment State."that is up to a court to decide; and, equal protection of the law cannot be ignored.there is no for-cause requirement in an at-will employment State. you merely appeal to ignorance.
This is the Law that should be enforced:
No, there is no requirement for a for-cause termination. But using it means protection for the employer and to make the employee ineligible for rehire or unemployment compensation.
If you break the law or break company rules, you suffer the consequences. Currently, that is not being eligible for rehire, possibly not being hired by other employers, and disqualification from receiving unemployment benefits. All of those are perfectly reasonable. Yes, they can fire you for any or no reason. But if you give them a good reason, it is ridiculous to say they should not be able to fire you for-cause.
Someone who is unemployed should be able to apply for unemployment compensation at the rock bottom cost of a form of minimum wage.
What is "rock bottom cost of a form of minimum wage" for an employee who has no marketable skills to offer?
Let's see. I have named several.
1) Making sure he does not get rehired.
2) Making sure any future employers know of his violations.
3) Making sure he does not profit from his own violation of known safety protocols.
All of those have good standing in our at-will employment states.