254
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2023
254 points (92.6% liked)
Asklemmy
43407 readers
1412 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
"At will" employment laws are load-bearers for all sorts of horrid ruling class abuses. They allow "at will" employees to be fired under any false pretenses and make it nearly impossible to prove those pretenses were false.
That's not what "at-will employment" means. It's an agreement between employer and employer that they agree to employment, and they both have the right to terminate for any or no reason. I have fired employees and been fired myself by employers based on this. Why use "false pretenses " when you don't have to. "You're fired." 'Why?" "Because you are." End of story.
The problem is you legally don't have the right to "terminate for any reason" when it comes to a number of protected classes, but these laws make it so we have to rely on you being stupid enough to create a massive trail of evidence (easy part with small business tyrants), but also litigate it for potentially years on end - harder
You're wrong. Employers do have the right to terminate members of a protected class as long as it's not because they are a protected class.
And they enjoy the unwritten privilege of pretending there wasn't a reason that was because of prejudice against the protected class. But you're so far up your own ass that you either can't see that or you refuse to see it because it benefits you.
I fired someone in a protected class maybe a year ago. They were, by their own admission incompetent. They were also falsifying their time card. All documented. I've done the same with a straight white guy. Is that my prejudice?
Look, I know it happens wrongfully. But don't accuse me of shit that you have no basis for. It detracts from your whole argument.
Can you at least try to write out your self-congratulatory autobiographical post without it reading like it could be narrated by Patrick Bateman?