• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

Should employers be legally required to provide a reason for firing?


  • Total voters
    40
I am waiting for a response to this:

If there is no reason to fire and employee why would and employer want to do it?
 
I am waiting for a response to this:

If there is no reason to fire and employee why would and employer want to do it?

yes- it's not so much 'no reason' it's 'whether that reason is acceptable or not'
 
I am waiting for a response to this:

If there is no reason to fire and employee why would and employer want to do it?

Spellcheck,Navy Pride,spell check.
And if I don't have a reason to fire an (notice no "d" at the end) then as an employer I won't.
That wouldn't make good business,especially if the employee is a good one.
 
Every job is different and requires different standards. Trying to impose blanket regulations covers up a lot of gray area.

On the contrary, all jobs have common employment themes, hours of work, rates of pay, skills required, performance, etc. Verthaine's list on the last page would get a European worker fired. The "three-strikes" type rule is widely applied, but if a failure is severe enough, instant dismissal is an option here too.
Not personally liking someone is not an adequate reason to take away their livelihood, and begs the question why you would have employed them in the first place.
 
The only problem that I have with companies being allowed to fire employees at a whim (i.e. they weren't fired for poor performance or anything they did wrong) is that the term 'fired' has a pretty negative connotation. If you get let go from your job and they say you were fired, it's going to be harder for you to get another job. I don't think employees should have to put up with the stigma of being fired if they were just let go because the company needs to save money, or they decided the person's position is redundant. Then again, if you required them to have a reason to fire someone, if they really wanted to get rid of the person, they'd just make something up.

The best compromise might be to let companies fire employees for whatever reason they want, but require that if they are contacted about why that person no longer works there, they must truthfully distinguish between employees who were fired for poor performance, and those who performed fine and were fired anyway.
 
I am waiting for a response to this:

If there is no reason to fire and employee why would and employer want to do it?

For a number of reasons:

What is you had a bigoted employer that decided he wanted to fire an employee because they were gay or muslim?

What if you had a sexist employer that wanted to fire a woman because she was pregnant or refused his advances?


Do you want more?
 
Not personally liking someone is not an adequate reason to take away their livelihood, and begs the question why you would have employed them in the first place.

It is impossible to fully know someone before you hire them; it's almost like marrying someone on the 2nd or third date. That, many times, leads to divorce. That should about answer your question.

A person's livlihood is there own responsibility. While I feel that a company has a moral obligation to treat its workers well, I don't believe they have or should have the legal obligation to do so. It's important for neither the employee nor the company to be trapped.

The best compromise might be to let companies fire employees for whatever reason they want, but require that if they are contacted about why that person no longer works there, they must truthfully distinguish between employees who were fired for poor performance, and those who performed fine and were fired anyway.

This already occurs, at least in my state. When a company fires a person, they file unemployment. In order not to have to pay their unemployment dollar for dollar, they must justify the firing to the labor department.
 
Last edited:
I am waiting for a response to this:

If there is no reason to fire and employee why would and employer want to do it?

Because some have their own agendas.

My mother was fired from one of her jobs for not getting a checking account at a certain bank for her check to be deposited into (she had a savings account at a different bank). Before she got home from the meeting in which she was fired, the guy was calling the house (it happened when I was a teen), in the first of many attempts to try to get her to come back. (She didn't since it wouldn't have been on her record that they fired her for such a stupid thing (it was done in the first couple of weeks she worked there) and, as a nurse, they could do something while she was working there that got her in enough trouble to lose her license or worse.)
 
Doing business in the United States does not come without a cost. Part of the cost of taking advantage of the vast resources of this country is adhering to the laws and values of this land. This includes abiding by the U.S. Constitution and its civil rights protections. This is why an employer cannot fire an employee on a whim or because they don't approve of their lifestyle, religion, etc.
 
I don't see it as my prerogative to tell another person who they may hire and fire and why they may or may not hire and fire them. And I damn sure would never draw a weapon in order to force them to obey my commands.

Were I to attempt to do so, I would expect to be looking down the barrel of their weapon, and they would have every right to shoot me for attempting to subjugate and enslave them.
 
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.
 
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.

I agree with you.
 
If they turn up on time, rarely go sick, perform their job, and get along with the other employees, why should they be fired without reason?

Some doesnt like you...you wont screw the boss, you did screw the boss so he is firing someone to promote you....your black...your hispanic...your white...your chinese...your gay...your ugly...you fart too much...
cmon man...people do get fired for a myriad of reasons and it doesnt have to be they are bad employees...
 
Y'all can be as incensed as you want about the "unfairness" of being fired "for no reason", but the bottom line is that unless termination procedures are documented in a contract or personnel manual, most businesses have the right to fire any employee for any reason... or even for no reason at all. :shrug:

If I'm the owner of a small business, I hire a kitchen worker who has a surly attitude, I'll fire his ass for the surly attitude. If he doesn't have a surly attitude, but talks non-stop and screws up kitchen communication, I'll fire his ass. If he just smirks and makes faces at people, I'll fire his ass. If I find out that I just don't like the guy, you bet your bongos I'll fire his ass for that, too.

My company, my business, I can hire whomever I please for whatever reason I please, and I also fire whomever I please. I don't have a duty to employ you if I've decided you're not the person I want in that job. Employees don't run the company; the owner runs the company. Kick and scream and hold your breath until you turn blue at the "unfairness" of it all, it is still my company and my right to decide who does or doesn't work for me.

(A pattern of long-term illegal descriminatory practices excepted, of course.)
 
Y'all can be as incensed as you want about the "unfairness" of being fired "for no reason", but the bottom line is that unless termination procedures are documented in a contract or personnel manual, most businesses have the right to fire any employee for any reason... or even for no reason at all. :shrug:

If I'm the owner of a small business, I hire a kitchen worker who has a surly attitude, I'll fire his ass for the surly attitude. If he doesn't have a surly attitude, but talks non-stop and screws up kitchen communication, I'll fire his ass. If he just smirks and makes faces at people, I'll fire his ass. If I find out that I just don't like the guy, you bet your bongos I'll fire his ass for that, too.

My company, my business, I can hire whomever I please for whatever reason I please, and I also fire whomever I please. I don't have a duty to employ you if I've decided you're not the person I want in that job. Employees don't run the company; the owner runs the company. Kick and scream and hold your breath until you turn blue at the "unfairness" of it all, it is still my company and my right to decide who does or doesn't work for me.

(A pattern of long-term illegal descriminatory practices excepted, of course.)

Small business I agree, you can fire at will......any large business no..and thats been proven time over in courts...there are avenues for small business people fired to air thier beefs...most dont
 
Small business I agree, you can fire at will......any large business no..and thats been proven time over in courts...there are avenues for small business people fired to air thier beefs...most dont

Large businesses and public entities (municipalities, etc.) must conform to the provisions of their personnel policies or private/union contracts... but they can still fire for just about any reason. There are higher documentation standards, but the reason for the firing could be as simple as "unsuitable personality for the position", codespeak for "nobody likes the guy". :)

Also, most larger employers have a mandatory probationary period, during which time the employee can be terminated at a moment's notice with no reason required.
 
Last edited:
Large businesses and public entities (municipalities, etc.) must conform to the provisions of their personnel policies or private/union contracts... but they can still fire for just about any reason. There are higher documentation standards, but the reason for the firing could be as simple as "unsuitable personality for the position", codespeak for "nobody likes the guy". :)

Di..employers lose descrimination cases all the time and in Non union shops...employers cannot do whatever they want to whenever they want...most people dont challenge them...but many that do win...
 
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.

Your boyfriend/girlfriend doesn't have to justify breaking up with, just like an employer doesn't have to justify letting you go. You have to either find your soulmate of a job, or work hard enough to convince your employer to keep you over others.
 
Di..employers lose descrimination cases all the time and in Non union shops...employers cannot do whatever they want to whenever they want...most people dont challenge them...but many that do win...

Descrimination cases are different. To win a descrimination case, the defendant must be proven to have engaged in repeated, documented, wrongful terminations based upon a protected status... age, race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religious beliefs... over such a period of time as to prove deliberate, descriminatory intent. There would usually have to be dozens upon dozens of people claiming they were descriminated against.

This is not the same as a company firing an employee they no longer wanted. For a single individual to win a descrimination case, there would have to be documentation of harassment based on their personal status, and incredibly stupid, documented statements that the individual was being terminated solely because of their personal status. That almost never happens.

Am I making sense? :)


Hundreds of thousands of people are terminated every year. Only a handful end up in court, and of them only a fraction ever win.
 
Last edited:
I cant accept such a right ,not every excuse should be a reason to fire people.
 
I cant accept such a right ,not every excuse should be a reason to fire people.

That's unreasonable. If I hire you to do a job, you don't do the job the way I want it done, I have the right to fire you and hire someone else. If I hire you to do a job, you do okay but not great, my profits go down and I have to cut expenses, I have a right to fire you. Simple, really.
 
Descrimination cases are different. To win a descrimination case, the defendant must be proven to have engaged in repeated, documented, wrongful terminations based upon a protected status... age, race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religious beliefs... over such a period of time as to prove deliberate, descriminatory intent. There would usually have to be dozens upon dozens of people claiming they were descriminated against.

This is not the same as a company firing an employee they no longer wanted. For a single individual to win a descrimination case, there would have to be documentation of harassment based on their personal status, and incredibly stupid, documented statements that the individual was being terminated solely because of their personal status. That almost never happens.

Am I making sense? :)


Hundreds of thousands of people are terminated every year. Only a handful end up in court, and of them only a fraction ever win.


Of course your making sense :)...I was thinking while reading this thread...why unions are necessary lol...I know that will start a chit storm...lol
 
That's unreasonable. If I hire you to do a job, you don't do the job the way I want it done, I have the right to fire you and hire someone else. If I hire you to do a job, you do okay but not great, my profits go down and I have to cut expenses, I have a right to fire you. Simple, really.

I mean real reasons like that must be valid for firing one
 
Back
Top Bottom