About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

124 Monthly Lab. Rev. 3 (2001)
The Employment-at-Will Doctrine: Three Major Exceptions

handle is hein.journals/month124 and id is 5 raw text is: The employment-at-will doctrine: three major exceptions In the United States, employees without a written employment contract generally can be fired for good cause, bad cause, or no cause at all; judicial exceptions to the rule seek to prevent wrongful terminations Work joyfully and peacefully, knowing that right thoughts and right efforts will inevitably bring about right results -James Allen See only that thou work and thou canst not escape the reward -Ralph Waldo Emerson ike Allen and Emerson, many workers in the United States believe that satisfactory job performance should be rewarded with, among other benefits, job security. However, this expectation that employees will not be fired if they perform their jobs well has eroded in recent decades in the face of an increased incidence of mass layoffs, reductions in companies' workforces, and job turnover. In legal terms, though, since the last half of the 19th century, employment in each of the United States has been at will, or terminable by either the employer or employee for any reason whatsoever. The em- ployment-at-will doctrine avows that, when an employee does not have a written employment contract and the term of employment is of indefi- nite duration, the employer can terminate the employee for good cause, bad cause, or no cause at all.' Traditionally and as recently as the early 1900s, courts viewed the relationship between employer and employee as being on equal foot- ing in terms of bargaining power. Thus, the em- ployment-at-will doctrine reflected the belief that people should be free to enter into employment contracts of a specified duration, but that no ob- ligations attached to either employer or employee if a person was hired without such a contract. Because employees were able to resign from po- sitions they no longer cared to occupy, employ- ers also were permitted to discharge employees at their whim. The Industrial Revolution planted the seeds for the erosion of the employment-at-will doctrine. When employees began forming unions, the col- lective bargaining agreements they subsequently negotiated with employers frequently had provi- sions in them that required just cause for adverse employment actions, as well as procedures for arbitrating employee grievances.2 The 1960s marked the beginning of Federal legislative pro- tections (including Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act) from wrongful discharge based on race, religion, sex, age, and national origin.3 These protections reflected the changing view of the relationship between employer and employee. Rather than seeing the relationship as being on equal footing, courts and legislatures slowly be- gan to recognize that employers frequently have structural and economic advantages when nego- tiating with potential or current employees. The recognition of employment as being central to a person's livelihood and well-being, coupled with Monthly Labor Review January 2001 3 Charles J. Muhl Charles J. Muhl, formerly an economist with the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, Dc, is an attorney in Chicago, Illinois.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most