3 ms·
The company is not mugging anyone. They are exercising their right to end a voluntary association. This is a perfectly valid choice that either party of the emp
by imgabe 3y ago
The company is not mugging anyone. They are exercising their right to end a voluntary association. This is a perfectly valid choice that either party of the employment relationship may make. If you usually shop at grocery store A and you decide you don't want to any more and shop at grocery store B instead, you're not "victimizing" grocery store A.
- sarchertech 3y agoNo one said that a company is mugging anyone. The point of the analogy is that failure to prepare doesn’t preclude being a victim. Most societies recognize that the employer to employee relationship is unbalanced in favor of the employer in a way that consumer to grocery store isn’t. Unemployment insurance, and severance requirements wouldn’t be necessary if the relationship were really the equally balanced market transaction you think that it is. Even the executives who do the laying off recognize the harm they are causing. I’ve been on calls with CEOs who were crying because they recognized (or wanted to appear that they recognized) the harm they were causing even if they thought it was justified. Victim is a perfectly reasonable word to describe the people on the receiving end of that harm.