The real reason for the asymmetry between the conventional obligations of employee and employer is the underlying power asymmetry. A typical employee's life has

The real reason for the asymmetry between the conventional obligations of employee and employer is the underlying power asymmetry. A typical employee's life has a single point of failure in his employer, while a typical company doesn't any comparable dependency; it is one-to-one vs. many-to-one. Employees can't afford to get informally blacklisted, they'll have trouble paying bills. Companies can always hire another guy who needs to make rent. Employees stand to lose everything, but when companies go away, capital finds a way. When a typical employee's BATNA against informal blacklisting on the employer grapevine is minimum wage, homelessness or gun in mouth they have no expectation of control over the situation, even if they do nothing wrong. Whereas a company does expect to have control; all they have to do is not write down any discriminatory reasons, and just claim underperformance. So if they want you to dance like a bear, you'll either dance like a bear or start scrambling to fund your early retirement. That's why we have nothing to say any time someone raises the question of how it's fair for things to be so asymmetrical: because it isn't fair, it's just what you have to do to make your monthly payments.