Employment At Will Doctrine

Abstract

The doctrine of employment-at-will avows that, an employee who does not have a written contract and their term of employment is for an indefinite duration, the employer has the right to terminate the employee's job for any type of cause be it good, bad none” (Muhl, 2012). The aim of this paper is explore the rights of such employees in contrast to the rights of the employers in a case study.

Table of Contents

Scenario 14

Scenario 25

Scenario 36

Scenario 46

References8

Employment At Will Doctrine

Scenario 1

Jennifer does not meet the necessary conditions and requirements that entails for her to perform her job effectively. The reason for this can be presumed that she was not truthful when handing in her application and during the interviewing process. The company took her on based on qualifications mentioned on her CV and if she cannot perform those tasks and furthermore is unwilling to learn them on job, she cannot be an asset for the company. Due to this, she should be let go from the firm with no chance of being re-hired. Doctrine of employment-at-will states that employees are hired based on their will and may choose to leave at any time post-employment. The same applies to the employers in the sense that they can fire her for any type of cause be it good, bad none. The employer doesn't hold any legal liability as long as no contract was signed upon employment (The Doctrine of employment at will, 1984). Out of the 3 exceptions of the will, only one applies in Virginia which is public policy.

This exception states that an employer may not terminate the employee if public policy supports the employee. In this case where Jennifer is not protected under public policy and since that is the only exception in Virginia, she should be fired. Another exception to the will is “implied contract”, which is a verbal agreement between the two parties. Furthermore employers also put this on employee handbooks. In it, the employee agrees to perform her tasks and if unable, he/she would be fired. Basically, giving the employer a chance to improve if they are not initially as capable. However, like previously stated, Virginia does not allow this exception, thus given her no room for filing a complaint. She was given a great chance for improvement, which was a big levy by the employer, but she did not capitalize. Therefore, there are not legal ramifications for firing her as soon as possible. As a supervisor, I would talk to her about her performance and convey that she does not meet the company's expectations. Therefore, she is no longer an asset and she would serve better at t different company.

Scenario 2

Jennifer obviously does not know the employment-at-will doctrine for Virginia. She is violating the company's late policy which she agreed upon at the time of her employment. Public policy is the only exception in Virginia which does not apply to her. She is breaking the company's policy and the firm has every right ...