this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2024
462 points (99.1% liked)

Work Reform

10046 readers
19 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Well if they named it honestly as "Right to Fire" then only 55% of voters would vote for it.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

That's a different thing entirely.

"Right to Work" is about the relationship between workers and unions. Specifically, it bans mandatory membership in unions and union-member-exclusive benefits. The most important part of that is it keeps unions from being able to collect union dues.

"At-will employment" is about the relationship between employer and employee, and is what allows someone to be fired for any non-protected reason or no reason at all. It's also the standard almost everywhere and has little impact most places because firing someone without cause still incurs payment for unemployment benefits.

Trust me, as a former manager, it's still very hard to get corporate permission to fire someone who shows up on time, sober, in dress code no matter how toxic or lazy they are.

[–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 day ago

That's "at-will" though, isn't it?

[–] haverholm@kbin.earth 2 points 1 day ago

And naming it honestly would go against spin doctors', advertisement professionals', and capitalists' right to work — which in their case is sugarcoating exploitation. But I guess they have that right 😡