• @Etterra
    link
    231 month ago

    Well if they named it honestly as “Right to Fire” then only 55% of voters would vote for it.

    • @chiliedogg
      link
      81 month ago

      That’s a different thing entirely.

      “Right to Work” is about the relationship between workers and unions. Specifically, it bans mandatory membership in unions and union-member-exclusive benefits. The most important part of that is it keeps unions from being able to collect union dues.

      “At-will employment” is about the relationship between employer and employee, and is what allows someone to be fired for any non-protected reason or no reason at all. It’s also the standard almost everywhere and has little impact most places because firing someone without cause still incurs payment for unemployment benefits.

      Trust me, as a former manager, it’s still very hard to get corporate permission to fire someone who shows up on time, sober, in dress code no matter how toxic or lazy they are.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        11 month ago

        It’s also the standard almost everywhere

        Only in the US.

        In Europe there are strict notice periods for both sides around terminating the employment agreement and the employer can’t fire you from one day to the next.

        • @chiliedogg
          link
          11 month ago

          What’s the punishment for it? In the US, the punishment is they have to keep paying you even though you aren’t working any longer, so it’s pretty uncommon to be terminated without cause.

          But on the flip side, an employee has ZERO obligation to remain at a job.

    • haverholm
      link
      fedilink
      21 month ago

      And naming it honestly would go against spin doctors’, advertisement professionals’, and capitalists’ right to work — which in their case is sugarcoating exploitation. But I guess they have that right 😡