View Poll Results: Should employers be legally required to provide a reason for firing?

Voters
47. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, Employers should not be allowed to fire for no reason

    20 42.55%
  • No, It's the employer's right to fire people.

    27 57.45%
Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 104

Thread: Should an employer be legally required to have a reason to fire an employee?

  1. #71
    Professor
    Phoenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    04-27-17 @ 10:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,782

    Re: Should an employer be legally required to have a reason to fire an employee?

    Quote Originally Posted by OhIsee.Then View Post
    You set up the poll like the question is a clear absolute, one way or the other. The issue is not that way. There are some valid and enforceable reasons to prevent firing. I volunteered for a RIF, later I found that I was already on the RIF list. People were chosen for several reasons some were valid but a major one one was religion, in my opinion, invalid.
    What's a RIF?
    From the ashes.

  2. #72
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,136

    Re: Should an employer be legally required to have a reason to fire an employee?

    reduction in force.

  3. #73
    Professor
    Phoenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    04-27-17 @ 10:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,782

    Re: Should an employer be legally required to have a reason to fire an employee?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ontologuy View Post
    If we look at the question through the present legal filter, yes, in most cases the employer should not have to give the employee a (truthful) reason for firing the employee.

    But law is often tilted in the direction of the ideology in power at the time of enactment, and once enacted, takes more than just a pendulum-swing in power to reverse. And even if reversal occurs, does either/or simply because of who's in power make any liberty or justice sense as far as doing the right thing in the situation, especially if there might be a more complex right answer than the simple either-or from who's in power?

    For those of you who fully support the employer not having to give a truthful reason to the fired employee in most cases, according to law, would you still be citing the law as good if the law said the reverse?

    To me, the question isn't asking what the law states at present or even should state at present, from a political persuasion perspective.

    To me, the question is what is really the right thing to do in this situation by the parties involved?

    That's why I believe that the liberty and justice of neither party, the employer or the employee, should be infringed in the matter.

    At first glance, therefore, it appeared to me that the employee's justice was needlessly being infringed by not receiving a truthful reason, and that neither the employer's liberty or justice was being infringed by providing one.

    Thus I say the employer should be required to provide the employee a truthful reason for the firing, and that the law should be changed to reflect that.

    But maybe if I analyzed this more deeply, using the same liberty and justice for all criteria, my analysis might reveal a different, more complex answer to the question to insure the best possible outcome of maintaining an optimal balance of freedom and security for both parties.

    I guess what I'm saying is that the method we employ and the depth we pursue the analysis to decide the matter is really huge.

    It's less a question, perhaps, of which of the two poll-answers you would choose.

    And more a question of what method would you use to decide.

    I think that typically people use their particular political persuasion as an off-the-cuff response, as that's pretty easy to do.

    But I don't believe that really arrives at the right-thing-to-do answer as often as people might want to think.
    For me it comes down to a matter of Contract Law. Employment is an equal exchange between two parties. The employee exchanges hours of their life for monetary compensation from the employer. Except in cases that have an actual contract with a specified time period the employment is an hour by hour contract and can be terminated by either party at will. I think it completely jerk move for an employers to walk in and say "You are fired, leave the building" but I believe the employer is (or should be) well within their rights to do it.
    From the ashes.

  4. #74
    Professor
    Phoenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    04-27-17 @ 10:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,782

    Re: Should an employer be legally required to have a reason to fire an employee?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wake View Post
    I think it's absolutely rotten and morally bankrupt to fire a person without any freaking reason.

    You're not dealing with material trinkets, but living, breathing humans that may have families they're trying to support.
    The business has many living breathing humans with families they are supporting. The business owner is human also. maybe with a family. The morality of dismissing an employee is not really the issue. It the legality I am asking about. It's one person's money and another person's labor. I contend neither should a right to the other unless both agree to it.
    From the ashes.

  5. #75
    Professor
    Phoenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    04-27-17 @ 10:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,782

    Re: Should an employer be legally required to have a reason to fire an employee?

    Quote Originally Posted by Helix View Post
    reduction in force.
    How do you know religion was a deciding factor in the choices?
    From the ashes.

  6. #76
    cookies crumble
    ARealConservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    04-21-17 @ 09:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,518

    Re: Should an employer be legally required to have a reason to fire an employee?

    a belief that it is in the best interest of one of the two parties involved in a voluntary association is all the reason necessary.

    should a person legally be required to cite a reason to end a romantic relationship with a person?

    I don't see any real difference in those two activities and from a legal perspective there shouldn't be, so long as all parties are in the private sector.

  7. #77
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Re: Should an employer be legally required to have a reason to fire an employee?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker View Post
    yes- it's not so much 'no reason' it's 'whether that reason is acceptable or not'
    OK the answer to that one is definitely no....
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

  8. #78
    Educator

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    12-11-17 @ 12:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    1,115

    Re: Should an employer be legally required to have a reason to fire an employee?

    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post
    The business has many living breathing humans with families they are supporting. The business owner is human also. maybe with a family. The morality of dismissing an employee is not really the issue. It the legality I am asking about. It's one person's money and another person's labor. I contend neither should a right to the other unless both agree to it.
    I think this is the bottom line. Companies tend to be seen as huge, deep pocketed, and inhuman. In fact, PEOPLE own companies and PEOPLE work in them. There are people, humans, on either side both deserving of consideration and respect. It's a matter of one person's rights complementing (and not infringing) on the rights of the other.

    I believe, just as the employee person may "cause themselves to work elsewhere," on a whim, and without providing any reason to the employer for doing so, the employer person may "cause the employee to work elsewhere," also with no reason or cause given.

  9. #79
    Professor

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    MI and AZ
    Last Seen
    03-15-15 @ 01:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,581

    Re: Should an employer be legally required to have a reason to fire an employee?

    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post
    For me it comes down to a matter of Contract Law. Employment is an equal exchange between two parties. The employee exchanges hours of their life for monetary compensation from the employer. Except in cases that have an actual contract with a specified time period the employment is an hour by hour contract and can be terminated by either party at will. I think it completely jerk move for an employers to walk in and say "You are fired, leave the building" but I believe the employer is (or should be) well within their rights to do it.
    One's employer, that has it's own standards, and one's boss, that has his own standards are different entities. Do you agree? It is easy to get fired for an invalid reason that your employer doesn't support. (I have fired someone that reported to me. Have you ever been in that position?)

  10. #80
    Sage
    Ontologuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,516

    Re: Should an employer be legally required to have a reason to fire an employee?

    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix View Post
    For me it comes down to a matter of Contract Law. Employment is an equal exchange between two parties. The employee exchanges hours of their life for monetary compensation from the employer. Except in cases that have an actual contract with a specified time period the employment is an hour by hour contract and can be terminated by either party at will. I think it completely jerk move for an employers to walk in and say "You are fired, leave the building" but I believe the employer is (or should be) well within their rights to do it.
    The challenge in deciding liberty and justice for both parties requires that we also examine the aftermath.

    A company, by virtue of being what it is, can survive, even thrive, after it fires an employee.

    But after being fired, it's much harder for the former employee to find new work compared to having been laid off, and, especially in today's lingering damaging effects from the recession that's "supposedly" over, it can soon be a question of having a roof over one's head or even eating or not for the truly laid-off employee who was wrongfully fired and without given reason, and thus can't receive unemployment insurance and is without life-supporting income until new work is found.

    And, because of the stigma of being fired, it makes it all that much harder on the employee to find work and survive afterward.

    Losing one's job can really be life-threatening soon thereafter to the employee. But firing an employee is just about always not life-threatening to the company/employer.

    These factors need to be rightly weighed in deciding the topical matter, which I contend is most fairly to be judged on a liberty and justice basis for both parties, so that neither has either infringed.

    Wihout a truthful reason being provided the employee for the firing, the employee does not know which recourse of contesting to the proper authorities to pursue.

    This greatly harms the former employee, reducing the employee's justice while increasing the employer's freedom beyond equal measure.
    Last edited by Ontologuy; 05-03-12 at 02:54 PM.
    You don't trust Trump? Well, there's only one way to leverage him to do what's economically right for us all: Powerful American Political Alliance. Got courage?! .. and a mere $5.00?

Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •