3 ms·

> ...he'll go down the street and work for a competitor. He knows that you'll dump him in an instant if you want to so he has no incentive to go the extra-mile

> ...he'll go down the street and work for a competitor. He knows that you'll dump him in an instant if you want to so he has no incentive to go the extra-mile for your company.... Exactly how I feel as an "at will" employee. At least the contractor has... whaddyacallit... a contract. I really have no incentive link to the company I work for beyond ensuring that they'll continue to have enough paid tasks to offer me for as long as I want to take them. Even if the company announced some sort of profit-sharing or bonuses, there's no reason for me to believe that I'd be able to collect. As far as I can tell, the only reason companies around here have employees at all is so they can credibly attach their resumes to bids and proposals.

secabeen 8y ago
Not every company is that way. There are places (often in education or government work) where the organization has specifically drafted policies that restrain the ability of the organization to fire employees at-will, and that will give an under-performing employee guidance and a process to improve work before being fired, or will give laid off employees a right of preferential re-hire if a job that they are qualified for opens up. Those policies are sometimes bypassed in extreme cases, such as workplace sexual harassment, or the like, but they can provide some assurance to an employee that they aren't going to be fired for arbitrary or capricious reasons.
- logfromblammo 8y ago
  If they can be bypassed, they do not provide assurance. A work contract provides assurance, if it has clauses on separation and severance. I have never had an actual contract, and have been fired at-will five times. I can't exactly say that "the company lost a big customer and wouldn't be able to make payroll" is arbitrary or capricious, but that only accounts for one. The rest, while never elucidated, were likely as follows: "the stock is at an all-time high, and we don't want any more of your options to vest", "we bought your company but don't want to keep you" (x2), and "we think you might blow the whistle on us blatantly gaming all of our metrics". I've only even had the chance to get out of Dodge before any axes fell once. A lot of these companies have been for [contractor] government work. I think the contractor companies would only enact such a policy if the largest customers demanded it. They won't do it just because they value employee retention highly, because clearly [to me] they do not.

secabeen 8y ago

Not every company is that way. There are places (often in education or government work) where the organization has specifically drafted policies that restrain the ability of the organization to fire employees at-will, and that will give an under-performing employee guidance and a process to improve work before being fired, or will give laid off employees a right of preferential re-hire if a job that they are qualified for opens up. Those policies are sometimes bypassed in extreme cases, such as workplace sexual harassment, or the like, but they can provide some assurance to an employee that they aren't going to be fired for arbitrary or capricious reasons.

logfromblammo 8y ago
If they can be bypassed, they do not provide assurance. A work contract provides assurance, if it has clauses on separation and severance. I have never had an actual contract, and have been fired at-will five times. I can't exactly say that "the company lost a big customer and wouldn't be able to make payroll" is arbitrary or capricious, but that only accounts for one. The rest, while never elucidated, were likely as follows: "the stock is at an all-time high, and we don't want any more of your options to vest", "we bought your company but don't want to keep you" (x2), and "we think you might blow the whistle on us blatantly gaming all of our metrics". I've only even had the chance to get out of Dodge before any axes fell once. A lot of these companies have been for [contractor] government work. I think the contractor companies would only enact such a policy if the largest customers demanded it. They won't do it just because they value employee retention highly, because clearly [to me] they do not.