Witty approach to protect AT-WILL contracted employees

[Medicol]

Do you have any smart ways or know any law articles or clauses that can protect employees 'rights who sign at-will contracts with their employers ?

 

[SkyLeach]

no, because the entire concept is built around the corporation being able to do whatever it wants to the individual. Laws have not yet been written to fix this problem.

 

[russ_watters]

Witty?

The best thing you can do to "protect yourself" is to do your job well.

Anyway, I don't see this situation (in general) as a "problem", I see it as equal/fair.

 

[SkyLeach]

I had a contract terminated once because my boss was an idiot and couldn't understand he was asking the impossible of me. I could prove it was impossible only to someone who understood the logic of what was being asked. Who was at fault, the idiot who hired the smart person to solve the problem and couldn't understand or the smart person who couldn't make the idiot understand?

 

[Medicol]

I agree, we need more rules to protect people of at will employment. Please send a formal letter to the government. At-will contractors are suffering...

 

[nitsuj]

Witty?

The best thing you can do to "protect yourself" is to do your job well.

Anyway, I don't see this situation (in general) as a "problem", I see it as equal/fair.

I do believe reasonability must be a common denominator in all dismissals, with a law against "wrongful dismissal" as an option for "enforcement" of the equal/fair treatment. Social assistance "bridges" between jobs is important (obviously dependent on reason for dismissal).

I also see no problem with "at-will" contracts, wanting the ability to have recourse due to being dismissed is laughable. It's like signing a one year employment contract and then after a year look to attempt to sue the employer for ending the contract after one year. lol

One caveat; if there is no caveat for an at-will employment "agreement" that is horsepuckey. it should be explicit, and documented. i.e. the potential employee must be [reasonably] fully aware of the conditions of employment, and via documentation that is proper for "admissible evidence".

So in the US in states with implied at-will employment contracts, I as an employer can entice employees with fancy pension promises and other time triggered employment benefits. Financially putting the employee in a position of loaning consideration to the employer (employer would be required to report the liability of accruing wages/benefits) . And then say a couple of years before those benefit triggers I dismiss the employee. Financially the employer writes off (cash account to non-cash account) the liability to say "Gain/loss - Their Pension/My Equity" on the income statement.

That simple example highlights the case law for at-will must be quite "robust", in other words equal/fair.

 

[edward]

I had a contract terminated once because my boss was an idiot and couldn't understand he was asking the impossible of me. I could prove it was impossible only to someone who understood the logic of what was being asked. Who was at fault, the idiot who hired the smart person to solve the problem and couldn't understand or the smart person who couldn't make the idiot understand?

That would make a good post in the first world problems thread.

 

[phinds]

I had a contract terminated once because my boss was an idiot and couldn't understand he was asking the impossible of me. I could prove it was impossible only to someone who understood the logic of what was being asked. Who was at fault, the idiot who hired the smart person to solve the problem and couldn't understand or the smart person who couldn't make the idiot understand?

Welcome to the real world.

 

[Choppy]

Do you have any smart ways or know any law articles or clauses that can protect employees 'rights who sign at-will contracts with their employers ?

Perhaps this is a little niave of me, but isn't this solved by the negotiation of the contract up front?

If you agree to an "at will" clause then a condition of agreeing to that might be that you would charge a larger fee or devine a contract termination fee or simply allow yourself to secure the contract in the first place in a competative market.

 

[Medicol]

Perhaps this is a little niave of me, but isn't this solved by the negotiation of the contract up front?

If you agree to an "at will" clause then a condition of agreeing to that might be that you would charge a larger fee or devine a contract termination fee or simply allow yourself to secure the contract in the first place in a competative market.

Sure I should have asked for higher pay :(

 

[Pete Cortez]

I had a contract terminated once because my boss was an idiot and couldn't understand he was asking the impossible of me. I could prove it was impossible only to someone who understood the logic of what was being asked. Who was at fault, the idiot who hired the smart person to solve the problem and couldn't understand or the smart person who couldn't make the idiot understand?

What alternatives did you offer?

 

[Doug Huffman]

LOL The at-will employee agreed to the contract indicating that there was a meeting of the minds when there evidently was not in the instant hypothetical. A client representing itself as an attorney has a fool for an attorney, hire a real one. Or unionize.