3 ms·

I didn't express any direct or detailed criticism of at-will in my comment, just my gladness that we don't have it. Why, despite the difficulties it causes me

I didn't express any direct or detailed criticism of at-will in my comment, just my gladness that we don't have it. Why, despite the difficulties it causes me when dealing with poor performing devs, am I happy we don't have at-will? Because at-will dramatically distorts the employer - employee social contract in favour of the employer. And employers already have a disparately large amount of power over their employees as it is. So there you go, that's my criticism of at-will employment. It puts the well being of the employer ahead of the well being of the employee. You can have a trial period without "at-will".

noobiemcfoob 7y ago
Gladness you don't have it is criticism you're trying to hide behind semantics. You and I seem to have different ideas of an employment social contract (or non-existence of one). Unless you're interested to dig into that difference, I don't think we have anywhere else to go with this thread.
- CraigJPerry 7y ago
  Gladness: "I'm glad i don't have a million dollars to manage in my bank account, just getting the best from my small savings is stressing me out!" Thankfully: "My bank account (thankfully) lacks a Bill Gates' sized stash of greenbacks, it does mean that it's impossible to buy a mansion though" I'm not criticising the concept of a million dollars in either of these statements. Thankfully, as used in the original context means something quite different to the meaning you've derived. I might still actually have a bone fide criticism of a million dollars, but that's neither here nor there in the context of either statement. I think wrapping it up's a fair shout though so no hard feelings and all the best.