Legislate "Just-Cause" for Employment Termination

Here is an issue I would like to see in a party platform: the abolition of "at-will" employment, and its replacement with the requirement of "just cause" for employment termination.  Allow me to explain.


I once had a job where I often met people who had just been fired.  Many of them said that their boss gave no reason for firing them, or that the reason they were given made no sense.  In most cases, there was little or no legal recourse for them.  I'd like to see that changed. 

The workers who were fired were distraught, naturally, and especially so in times of high unemployment.  They had bills to pay and families to feed.  Unemployment benefits didn't go far.  Continuing their health insurance meant paying the full premium themselves.  Getting Medicaid would take time.  They might have to move, anyway.  Their world had been turned upside down.  Didn't the boss at least have to give them a reason, a good reason, for terminating their employment?

In the vast majority of cases, the answer was, "No." 

You see, the prevailing theory in American employment law, from what I have read, is the “At Will” doctrine.  It is based on an article published by Horace Gray Wood in 1877 concerning “master-servant” relations.  Prior to Mr. Wood, employer-employee relations in the U.S. were governed by English common law, which presumed, in the absence of any contract, that employment was “to be for one-year increments, absent termination for good cause,” and that “any termination would require reasonable notice prior to termination.” Wood argued, however, that the employment relationship was entirely “at will” and could be terminated “at will” if there was no proof that the employment was for a definite time period. This was music to employers, and it quickly became case law throughout the nation. Any employee, unless covered by a contract, could be discharged at will – for good reasons, for bad reasons, or for no reason at all.

The effects of this doctrine went far beyond the question of motives for discharge. It morphed, logically, to encompass the entirety of working conditions. “No employment contract” means that all of your terms and conditions of employment, your hours, your wages and your benefits can be set, changed or ended at the whim of your employer. If you don’t like the arrangement, you can leave or be fired. If unemployment is high, too bad. Have a boo-hoo on your way out.

It is true that American workers have gained some protections from the whimsy, malice and calculated disregard of corporate overlords. But these protections are incomplete. There are laws against discrimination, but the laws don’t touch every employer, and many common forms of discrimination are still allowed. There are certain legal requirements regarding wages, but they don’t cover every employee. There are laws intended to ensure worker safety, but there are also loopholes you can fall through. There are some unions to establish work contracts, but American unions have been on the decline, and they are scarcely as strong as their European counterparts. Nevertheless, our corporate overlords and their political vassals see these laws, regulations, and unions as infringing upon their freedom: the freedom guaranteed by the at-will employment doctrine to treat their fellow citizens with all of the consideration given to migrant farm workers.

This is in keeping with the authoritarian view of superiors and inferiors, but it is at odds with democratic principles. Democracy begins with the presumption that members of the social compact are political equals. American workers, therefore, should be given what they expect and deserve as citizens of this nation: equitable employment, as a matter of case law and statute.

Is that impractical?  It's already the law in Canada.  And it's already present in union contracts in the USA.    

Is it unreasonable to demand just cause for employment termination?  Even now, an employer who can't show just cause for dismissing an "at-will" employee is taking a risk.  If the ex-employee files suit over his or her dismissal, the employer's inability to show "just cause" for the action could have expensive consequences.

So why not make it the  law already?


For additional information, see:
Employment At Will: What Does It Mean?  If you are employed at will, your employer does not need good cause to fire you.

Employment At-Will: Sacred Writ or Big Lie?


Legal Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.