3 ms·
It wasn't enforced in your friend's cases though. Their employers got the heebie jeebies. That's an at-will issue. I do agree that the NLRB should go on an adv
by anon291 3y ago
It wasn't enforced in your friend's cases though. Their employers got the heebie jeebies. That's an at-will issue.
I do agree that the NLRB should go on an advertising campaign to inform employers that previous employers threatening legal action basically have no basis in law and you should just send them a reply saying 'No thanks'. Because that's what you should do in virtually all circumstances.
- kelnos 3y agoI think the distinction doesn't really matter. If an action taken by a company -- even if based on illegal contract terms -- causes harm, then the effect is the same. The idea of the "chilling effect" is predicated on this: if someone can ruin your life even if you are in the right and they are in the wrong, it doesn't matter what the law actually says.
- anon291 3y agoI agree, and I would like to see tougher enforcement of such behavior.