4 ms·
> I'll bite: why should management just be able to fire people unilaterally? Well because employment is an agreement to which both sides agree voluntarily. Wo
by JackFr 4y ago
> I'll bite: why should management just be able to fire people unilaterally?
Well because employment is an agreement to which both sides agree voluntarily. Workers can quit unilaterally, why shouldn't management have the same right?
Don't get me wrong -- I'm not opposed to workers protections in general, but I think of them as a pragmatic benefit to the broader society. In general, I don't see it as immoral or unethical for either side to terminate an ongoing voluntary commercial relationship.
- cool_dude85 4y agoAs is often the case with these types of things, there are serious power asymmetries that need to be considered. My threat to terminate this voluntary relationship is that my employer will have some small amount of trouble, probably offloaded onto my ex coworkers. My employer's threat to terminate this voluntary relationship is that I may be kicked out of where I live, made homeless, unable to support my family, etc. Can we really call this a voluntary relationship where both sides have meaningfully agreed?
- JackFr 4y agoYes, it is voluntary. Your employer has likely made consequential financial plans on the assumption of your continued employment. He might have entered into contracts, invested in equipment, etc. and yet you can quit and trash those and happily be at work the following day for someone else. At will employment is truly a voluntary exchange. (That is why many people have contracts.) Again, however I agree some level of worker protections are reasonable for a pragmatic reasons at a societal level, but not because of a power asymmetry at the employer employee level.