• Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    That’s not true at all in many countries. You can’t just fire someone for no reason. It doesn’t have to be a good reason but you need a reason. Also if someone is fired because of something that is protected under law like pregnancy they can come back and sue.

    • andrewta@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      True. Sorry should have specified in the US they can just say we are letting you go and you’re done. Which as far as I’m concerned is basically a catch all statement of “we aren’t going to tell you why, we are just firing you”.

        • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          I worked for a company that trained me that “right to work” meant I could fire someone and tell them it was because I didn’t like the color of their shoes. I suppose that’s an excuse or reason but at that point is there really any difference?

          • Pandantic [they/them]@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Right to work means they can’t be required to join a union. They / you are thinking of “at will employment”. You may get this confused because some states pass them together.