They should be allowed to draft any kind of employment contract they want with any criteria for termination they want. An employer should be free to use their money as they want and an employee should be free to have a contract presented to them to agree too listing reasons for termination. So in essence, yes. However, it should be limited to a mutually agreed upon contract.
Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
this already happens and i support it 100%
Im totally fine with contracts that have moral clauses and conduct clauses etc etc if people sign that then so be it a contract is a contract
but the difference is they still cant illegally discriminante who they offer the job too based on religion, gender, race etc
A contract between two parties as described by digsbe would be completely dependent upon the preferences of the actors themselves, and only themselves. As contract law currently stands, regardless of willingness by the parties involved, certain things may not be legally contracted. For example, no matter how much I desired to do so, I could not hire out my labor for less than the minimum wage. The government acts as an interested third party even in cases where the two actors which are physically involved in the contract itself do not want the government involved.
In other words, contracts between two consenting adults must be approved by Uncle Sam before it becomes enforceable. Thus, grey and black market contracts abound.
Originally Posted by digsbeThese stances are not mutually compatible. If a contract does not specify allowable reasons for termination, then any reason is acceptable. This includes religion, race, gender, odor, appearance, or any other complaint. Illegality is only an issue when the government intrudes as a third party; the argument is to remove government as a third party and make labor contracts a solely immediate agent issue.Originally Posted by AGENT J