First, there's a huge difference between having the freedom to quit at any point in time (even with giving a notice) and an employer not being able to terminate an employee unless they have a reason the employee or others understands or feel is legitimate. This puts an undue restraint on the employer and their company when it comes to making choices that they feel is in the best interest of their company.
Second, if an employee is terminated, there was a reason or the employee wouldn't have been terminated. The employee may not agree with that reason. And, the reason may be totally ridiculous, as in your excellent example in an earlier post of the pit boss cleaning house to hire his buddies (this should be addressed by company practices and procedures). But, the employee can still leave at any time they want to for whatever reason they want, even if the employer feels it was a ridiculous reason, so the employer and employee have the same level of power over their own future.
Third, as to a notice given by either the employee or employer... An employer cannot give notice of a termination with a delay in departure in most instances since the employer would be opening themselves to sabotage or worse by a potentially disgruntled soon to be ex-employee. In the case of a mass layoff, notice is historically given to the entirety of the workforce that it's coming, but the individuals that will be furloughed are usually not informed until the day it actually occurs. As to the employee giving notice to the employer of their quitting, this has historically been done as a professional courtesy to ensure a good reference be given by their soon to be previous employer to potential new employers. If the employee gets p'ed off at the employer and leaves on bad terms, they probably wont give notice, walk out that minute, and not care about the reference from that job.
OK, I made some calls to people I know that work for the Casinos. Here is my anecdotal information.
Almost all "hourly workers" are in a Union. They do NOT have to join the Union or pay dues to receive the exact same benefits but the Union will not defend them if they get in trouble whereas paid Union members will have better representation.
98% of all these workers are indeed Union members. Why asked Specklebang? Why would you pay for something that is potentially free?
The answer (educated guess) is that it is out of loyalty, intimidation and stupidity (a snarky comment - not a fact) has caused virtually everyone to sign up.
So, it seems not to matter too much and people like the perceived safety of Union membership.
I have issues with fairness. I believe you should "pay your way". I think if I worked in a Union job, I would be comfortable paying the dues, just about as comfortable as I feel about paying taxes. I don't WANT to pay taxes or dues or anything, but I'm philosophical about it. (That's why I'm a DISCOUNT Philosopher, not a particularly good one).
Apparently, 98% of the people feel the way I do and this comfort or confidence is worth the price of the ticket, they join so it would seem that "right to work" is not harmful and gives us a rarely seen glimpse of personal choice in an increasingly micromanaged society.
I'm in favor of right to work laws IF they come with a corresponding laws that doesn't require unions to represent people who don't pay dues. I don't like the current situation where people can refuse to pay union dues but the union is still required by law to represent them.
If you build a man a fire, he'll be warm for a day.
If you set a man on fire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Unions are protected under the 1st amendment but no one should be compelled to join one.
Unions can be a really great thing that can even out the playing field, but no one should be coerced into joining one. Forced association is not free association.
"If I take death into my life, acknowledge it, and face it squarely, I will free myself from the anxiety of death and the pettiness of life - and only then will I be free to become myself." ~ Martin Heidegger
I do not support any person or business having to keep an employee that they no longer wish to employ.
“Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.”
― Stephen R. Covey
I'm against adding extra letters to words.
I am neither for nor against.
If I am against anything, it would have to do with carefully crafted framing techniques, the origins of which being in various think tanks created by those with a vested interest in shaping public opinion.
"you're better off on Stormfront discussing how evil brown men are taking innocent white flowers." Infinite Chaos