5 ms·

>there was no urgent reason given to justify the immediate dismissal given.” He alleged that the termination was disproportionate Damn sweet. I wish we had suc

>there was no urgent reason given to justify the immediate dismissal given.” He alleged that the termination was disproportionate Damn sweet. I wish we had such great employee protection laws in Austria, where the company/employer can terminate your employment relationship without any reason at all. >Less than a week after the plaintiff was fired, the Rijswijk branch of Chetu Inc. was deregistered from the Chamber of Commerce and shut down on 2 September, records show So the company knew they were in the wrong for firing him and immediately shut down their Dutch operations to avoid the lawsuit.

yosamino 4y ago
Not true that in Austria you can be terminated for any reason at all. There are protections in place. For example, in the regular case, i.e. 'no urgent reason' there is no such thing as an immediate dismissal, and this can be fought. Of course as always with the law ymmv - but there are many different ways in which your rights as a worker are protected. See this: https://www.usp.gv.at/mitarbeiter/beendigung-arbeitsverhaeltnis.html https://www.usp.gv.at/mitarbeiter/beendigung-arbeitsverhaelt...
- 6stringmerc 4y ago
  Very similar in Texas - it is called At Will employment. Other states are Right to Work. Each has pros and cons. I’ve only lived and worked in Texas so At Will is very close to “for any reason” as long as it’s not against the law. Don’t like your haircut? They can shut can you on the spot. On the flip side, if one day you go in and you’ve just had enough of the hourly retail job and think you can get a better one, you can up and walk out then and there. Usually we flash the double V for Victory sign and say “Peace out!” when that’s the case. It’s fun. I remember working as a waiter once and the Manager started assigning employees cleaning duties like getting on ladders for ceiling vents. Waiters get paid by tips, salary was $2.13 an hour at the time. When he asked me I told him I wouldn’t do it and would call the Workforce Commission if he wanted to push the issue. Needless to say I was the only front of house person not cleaning shit like a chump that day.
  - esprehn 4y ago
    "Right to work" is a different concept related to unions, and includes Texas: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-to-work_law https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-to-work_law All the states are At Will, but a number of them have exceptions that provide certain protections (ex. Not being fired for following the law): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment
    - temac 4y ago
      I love how only some are providing the protection of not being fired for following the law. Can they order you to organize a coup, some terrorist acts, or a murder in the others?
  - astura 4y ago
    >it is called At Will employment. Other states are Right to Work. Wtf? No, "right to work" is not the opposite of "at will," they have almost nothing to do with each other. Furthermore, Texas IS a "right to work" state. "Right-to-work" laws are laws that make joining a union not a requirement for employment. All states in the US are "at will" employment.
  - lucb1e 4y ago
    > Usually we flash the double V for Victory sign and say “Peace out!” when that’s the case. It’s fun. Sounds like a good way to burn bridges. If I'd show up to work one day and tell them to suck it up for the next few months of planned projects, I do know what kind of reference my boss would provide to future employers. It's not about loyalty or something, but so long as there isn't anything egregious, it does seem reasonable to me that both sides can expect a notice periods.
    - ghaff 4y ago
      >it does seem reasonable to me that both sides can expect a notice periods Two weeks is pretty customary and normal in the US. A few months of planned projects being a reason you "can't" leave really is not. I generally have projects in some stage of planning going out a while. That wouldn't mean I'm effectively tied to an employer for te duration.
- ChuckNorris89 4y ago
  >Not true that in Austria you can be terminated for any reason at all. There are protections in place. Not true at all what you claim about Austria. There are zero protections in place for workers here unless you're over 50 or work at a place with a union (worker's council) that will fight for you. If you work for a small tech company you have no protections against unfair dismissal. Basically your boss can tell you at any time "in 30 days you won't work here anymore, goodbye" without any reason. Unlike other EU countries where you need to provide a specific legal reason why you're letting an employee go or you can get sued for unfair dismissal like the man in the article did to his former employer. I spoke to Arbeite Kammer after being dismissed for no reason by a douchebag boss and they told me "your employer doesn't need a reason to dismiss you according to Austrian labor law". My jaw dropped when I realized that Austria is basically, similar to US in this regard, where you get no protection against unfair dismissal except that here you get about 30-60 day notice period to find another job while you continue to work for your current employer. Austrian employers are even allowed to dismiss you while you're on sick leave. Crazy stuff. Very backwards employment laws for an EU county.
  - the_mitsuhiko 4y ago
    I disagree. Austria’s labor protections are fine. If you make rules around dismissals stricter then you greatly harm the ability for a company to hire in the first place. The current rules give you plenty of protection as an employee that you can find a new place of work and not suffer financially.
    - ChuckNorris89 4y ago
      >Austria’s labor protections are fine When they're objectively worse than every other EU country, bordering on competing with the US, I can hardly call them "fine". >If you make rules around dismissals stricter then you greatly harm the ability for a company to hire in the first place. Please stop parroting the propaganda of the conservative party (ÖVP) who are bought and paid for by the business elite and would gladly tell us working 60h/week is in our best interest. The stricter employee protections in other EU countries haven't harmed the economy or innovations there. Do you see Netherlands or Sweden doing poorly economically because of their better employee protection laws? In fact their innovation and tech sectors are far above Austria's. Nor did the lack of employee protection laws boost Austria's economic sector. Have you looked at Austrian skilled wages? They earn the lowest wages of all the German speaking countries causing an exodus of doctors and other skilled specialists to Germany and Switzerland, while Austrian devs make Eastern European wages. So how did the lack of worker protections help with this? Maybe fixing the needlessly complex and conservative bureaucracy and high tax burdens on employers and employees would help improve the Austrian economic sector and make it more competitive and attractive for business, instead of taking away employee rights in a race to the bottom hoping that going the sweatshop route will make it more competitive.
nraynaud 4y ago
Plus you can always fire anyone for any reason in the EU, just give them enough money to stomach it.
- em-bee 4y ago
  and give them at least one month notice as well as pay out their unused holidays.
  - isbvhodnvemrwvn 4y ago
    Not really, mutual agreements are a thing. If you pay someone with one month notice 3 months worth of pay to leave on the same day, they would be stupid not to take it.
    - em-bee 4y ago
      ok, yeah, as long as you pay more than the remaining working time. but an employee has to watch out how that affects unemployment benefits.
    - Ekaros 4y ago
      3 months I feel bit questionable still. As depending on location there might be loss of unemployment benefits.
      - nraynaud 4y ago
        yeah, you have to go higher than what they would get in court.
- Ekaros 4y ago
  Worst thing that can happen is being taken to court and ordered to pay some money.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
dsr_ 4y ago
I assume the company is not in good financial condition, either -- 75,000 euros should not be terribly burdensome, otherwise.
gambiting 4y ago
In the UK most people don't know that for the first 2 years of employment you can be let go for any reason(as long as it's legal) or no reason at all. Only after 2 years various employee protections kick in.
- tankenmate 4y ago
  However there about 60 reasons that a dismissed employee can claim that it was automatically unfair to fire them, regardless of length of tenure.
gambiting 4y ago
>>So the company knew they were in the wrong for firing him and immediately shut down their Dutch operations to avoid the lawsuit. Or he was their only Dutch employee so there was no point in keeping their Dutch entity open.
the_mitsuhiko 4y ago
Note that it’s only the notice period that this considers. The Netherlands and Austria are the same in that you can terminate an employee without reason. //edit: apparently that’s incorrect for the Netherlands. Must have mixed that up.
- stoltzmann 4y ago
  That's incorrect. Employers in the Netherlands must have a valid reason to fire staff - see https://business.gov.nl/running-your-business/staff/dismissing-staff/grounds-for-dismissal/ https://business.gov.nl/running-your-business/staff/dismissi...
  - the_mitsuhiko 4y ago
    I just saw. For some reason I thought that the Netherlands have no restrictions there but apparently I was wrong.
- Etheryte 4y ago
  This is not true at all. It's notoriously hard to fire someone in the Netherlands.
  - lucb1e 4y ago
    I've always wondered about this. In my contract, it says there is a few months' notice period, both when I want to stop working there as well as when they want me to stop working there. When reviewing the contract, it sounded reasonable and I just assumed that when I get the notice, that's how it is. Later, I learned of these "there must be a valid reason" type of protections. Does that make this whole clause void? Or even working in my favor, that is: even if there is a valid reason, our contract adds those months of notice period?
bryanlarsen 4y ago
At one time I was told that it was very easy to fire someone in Denmark. I have no idea how true it is, but it was at a time when the Danish economy was doing much better than the German one, and the anecdote was trying to explain why. It was a constrast of Denmark, Germany and the US. In Germany it was hard to fire somebody, so employers were reluctant to hire. Denmark & the US had no such troubles, but the difference between Denmark and the US was that a fired employee in the US loses health care, et cetera. OTOH the fired Danish employee falls into the generous Danish social security. The anecdote was that the Danish rules were the best of both worlds. It's hearsay, but I found it convincing. Austrian social security isn't as good as Denmark's, IIRC, but it's much better than the US's, so perhaps Austria is close to the optimum of the guy telling me that anecdote?

yosamino 4y ago

Not true that in Austria you can be terminated for any reason at all. There are protections in place. For example, in the regular case, i.e. 'no urgent reason' there is no such thing as an immediate dismissal, and this can be fought. Of course as always with the law ymmv - but there are many different ways in which your rights as a worker are protected. See this: https://www.usp.gv.at/mitarbeiter/beendigung-arbeitsverhaeltnis.html https://www.usp.gv.at/mitarbeiter/beendigung-arbeitsverhaelt...

6stringmerc 4y ago
Very similar in Texas - it is called At Will employment. Other states are Right to Work. Each has pros and cons. I’ve only lived and worked in Texas so At Will is very close to “for any reason” as long as it’s not against the law. Don’t like your haircut? They can shut can you on the spot. On the flip side, if one day you go in and you’ve just had enough of the hourly retail job and think you can get a better one, you can up and walk out then and there. Usually we flash the double V for Victory sign and say “Peace out!” when that’s the case. It’s fun. I remember working as a waiter once and the Manager started assigning employees cleaning duties like getting on ladders for ceiling vents. Waiters get paid by tips, salary was $2.13 an hour at the time. When he asked me I told him I wouldn’t do it and would call the Workforce Commission if he wanted to push the issue. Needless to say I was the only front of house person not cleaning shit like a chump that day.
- esprehn 4y ago
  "Right to work" is a different concept related to unions, and includes Texas: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-to-work_law https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-to-work_law All the states are At Will, but a number of them have exceptions that provide certain protections (ex. Not being fired for following the law): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment
  - temac 4y ago
    I love how only some are providing the protection of not being fired for following the law. Can they order you to organize a coup, some terrorist acts, or a murder in the others?
- astura 4y ago
  >it is called At Will employment. Other states are Right to Work. Wtf? No, "right to work" is not the opposite of "at will," they have almost nothing to do with each other. Furthermore, Texas IS a "right to work" state. "Right-to-work" laws are laws that make joining a union not a requirement for employment. All states in the US are "at will" employment.
- lucb1e 4y ago
  > Usually we flash the double V for Victory sign and say “Peace out!” when that’s the case. It’s fun. Sounds like a good way to burn bridges. If I'd show up to work one day and tell them to suck it up for the next few months of planned projects, I do know what kind of reference my boss would provide to future employers. It's not about loyalty or something, but so long as there isn't anything egregious, it does seem reasonable to me that both sides can expect a notice periods.
  - ghaff 4y ago
    >it does seem reasonable to me that both sides can expect a notice periods Two weeks is pretty customary and normal in the US. A few months of planned projects being a reason you "can't" leave really is not. I generally have projects in some stage of planning going out a while. That wouldn't mean I'm effectively tied to an employer for te duration.
ChuckNorris89 4y ago
>Not true that in Austria you can be terminated for any reason at all. There are protections in place. Not true at all what you claim about Austria. There are zero protections in place for workers here unless you're over 50 or work at a place with a union (worker's council) that will fight for you. If you work for a small tech company you have no protections against unfair dismissal. Basically your boss can tell you at any time "in 30 days you won't work here anymore, goodbye" without any reason. Unlike other EU countries where you need to provide a specific legal reason why you're letting an employee go or you can get sued for unfair dismissal like the man in the article did to his former employer. I spoke to Arbeite Kammer after being dismissed for no reason by a douchebag boss and they told me "your employer doesn't need a reason to dismiss you according to Austrian labor law". My jaw dropped when I realized that Austria is basically, similar to US in this regard, where you get no protection against unfair dismissal except that here you get about 30-60 day notice period to find another job while you continue to work for your current employer. Austrian employers are even allowed to dismiss you while you're on sick leave. Crazy stuff. Very backwards employment laws for an EU county.
- the_mitsuhiko 4y ago
  I disagree. Austria’s labor protections are fine. If you make rules around dismissals stricter then you greatly harm the ability for a company to hire in the first place. The current rules give you plenty of protection as an employee that you can find a new place of work and not suffer financially.
  - ChuckNorris89 4y ago
    >Austria’s labor protections are fine When they're objectively worse than every other EU country, bordering on competing with the US, I can hardly call them "fine". >If you make rules around dismissals stricter then you greatly harm the ability for a company to hire in the first place. Please stop parroting the propaganda of the conservative party (ÖVP) who are bought and paid for by the business elite and would gladly tell us working 60h/week is in our best interest. The stricter employee protections in other EU countries haven't harmed the economy or innovations there. Do you see Netherlands or Sweden doing poorly economically because of their better employee protection laws? In fact their innovation and tech sectors are far above Austria's. Nor did the lack of employee protection laws boost Austria's economic sector. Have you looked at Austrian skilled wages? They earn the lowest wages of all the German speaking countries causing an exodus of doctors and other skilled specialists to Germany and Switzerland, while Austrian devs make Eastern European wages. So how did the lack of worker protections help with this? Maybe fixing the needlessly complex and conservative bureaucracy and high tax burdens on employers and employees would help improve the Austrian economic sector and make it more competitive and attractive for business, instead of taking away employee rights in a race to the bottom hoping that going the sweatshop route will make it more competitive.

nraynaud 4y ago

Plus you can always fire anyone for any reason in the EU, just give them enough money to stomach it.

em-bee 4y ago
and give them at least one month notice as well as pay out their unused holidays.
- isbvhodnvemrwvn 4y ago
  Not really, mutual agreements are a thing. If you pay someone with one month notice 3 months worth of pay to leave on the same day, they would be stupid not to take it.
  - em-bee 4y ago
    ok, yeah, as long as you pay more than the remaining working time. but an employee has to watch out how that affects unemployment benefits.
  - Ekaros 4y ago
    3 months I feel bit questionable still. As depending on location there might be loss of unemployment benefits.
    - nraynaud 4y ago
      yeah, you have to go higher than what they would get in court.
Ekaros 4y ago
Worst thing that can happen is being taken to court and ordered to pay some money.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

dsr_ 4y ago

I assume the company is not in good financial condition, either -- 75,000 euros should not be terribly burdensome, otherwise.

gambiting 4y ago

In the UK most people don't know that for the first 2 years of employment you can be let go for any reason(as long as it's legal) or no reason at all. Only after 2 years various employee protections kick in.

tankenmate 4y ago
However there about 60 reasons that a dismissed employee can claim that it was automatically unfair to fire them, regardless of length of tenure.

gambiting 4y ago

>>So the company knew they were in the wrong for firing him and immediately shut down their Dutch operations to avoid the lawsuit. Or he was their only Dutch employee so there was no point in keeping their Dutch entity open.

the_mitsuhiko 4y ago

Note that it’s only the notice period that this considers. The Netherlands and Austria are the same in that you can terminate an employee without reason. //edit: apparently that’s incorrect for the Netherlands. Must have mixed that up.

stoltzmann 4y ago
That's incorrect. Employers in the Netherlands must have a valid reason to fire staff - see https://business.gov.nl/running-your-business/staff/dismissing-staff/grounds-for-dismissal/ https://business.gov.nl/running-your-business/staff/dismissi...
- the_mitsuhiko 4y ago
  I just saw. For some reason I thought that the Netherlands have no restrictions there but apparently I was wrong.
Etheryte 4y ago
This is not true at all. It's notoriously hard to fire someone in the Netherlands.
- lucb1e 4y ago
  I've always wondered about this. In my contract, it says there is a few months' notice period, both when I want to stop working there as well as when they want me to stop working there. When reviewing the contract, it sounded reasonable and I just assumed that when I get the notice, that's how it is. Later, I learned of these "there must be a valid reason" type of protections. Does that make this whole clause void? Or even working in my favor, that is: even if there is a valid reason, our contract adds those months of notice period?

bryanlarsen 4y ago

At one time I was told that it was very easy to fire someone in Denmark. I have no idea how true it is, but it was at a time when the Danish economy was doing much better than the German one, and the anecdote was trying to explain why. It was a constrast of Denmark, Germany and the US. In Germany it was hard to fire somebody, so employers were reluctant to hire. Denmark & the US had no such troubles, but the difference between Denmark and the US was that a fired employee in the US loses health care, et cetera. OTOH the fired Danish employee falls into the generous Danish social security. The anecdote was that the Danish rules were the best of both worlds. It's hearsay, but I found it convincing. Austrian social security isn't as good as Denmark's, IIRC, but it's much better than the US's, so perhaps Austria is close to the optimum of the guy telling me that anecdote?