Why do poor communities exist in America?

[danielpalos]

No. Every person is still allowed to quit at any time. That is what the law says. And every employer can fire someone without reason. That is what the law says.

The at-will employment law has not been abridged.

Yes, it has because a public policy abridges at-will employment law for unemployment compensation.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes and that is not being violated

At-will employment is generally described as follows: "any hiring is presumed to be 'at will'; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals 'for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,' and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work."

Any public policy which abridges that legal doctrine is unConstitutional.

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

 

[Soupnazi630]

At-will employment is generally described as follows: "any hiring is presumed to be 'at will'; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals 'for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,' and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work."

Any public policy which abridges that legal doctrine is unConstitutional.

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

There is no law abridging it.

 

[danielpalos]

There is no law abridging it.

Requiring Cause for any public policy in an at-will employment State is an Abridgement of at-will employment law.

 

[danielpalos]

All public policies in an at-will employment State must follow this legal doctrine:

At-will employment is generally described as follows: "any hiring is presumed to be 'at will'; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals 'for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,' and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work."

 

[WinterBorn]

Yes, there is. Unemployment compensation has to follow at-will employment law regarding Cause.

No, it does not. The entire reason the Unemployment Compensation was created was to provide temporary assistance to those who lost their job through no fault of their own. It has absolutely nothing to do with at-will employment laws. UC is the exact same in right-to-work states.

 

[WinterBorn]

Requiring Cause for any public policy in an at-will employment State is an Abridgement of at-will employment law.

No, it is not. Nothing has changed in the at-will employment law. Nothing.

 

[WinterBorn]

All public policies in an at-will employment State must follow this legal doctrine:

At-will employment is generally described as follows: "any hiring is presumed to be 'at will'; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals 'for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,' and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work."

Nothing in the Unemployment Compensation programs violates the at-will employment laws. Both the employee and the employer have the exact same rights under the unemployment compensation laws.

 

[WinterBorn]

Yes, it has because a public policy abridges at-will employment law for unemployment compensation.

It does not abridge the rights of the employer or employee under the at-will employment law. Nothing in the unemployment compensation laws stop workers from quitting, prevent employers from terminating employees, or employees from going on strike.

 

[danielpalos]

No, it does not. The entire reason the Unemployment Compensation was created was to provide temporary assistance to those who lost their job through no fault of their own. It has absolutely nothing to do with at-will employment laws. UC is the exact same in right-to-work states.

Yes, it does. Otherwise, legislatures are not authorized to enact public policy that denies or disparages the legal doctrine of employment at will of either party even for unemployment compensation.

 

[danielpalos]

No, it is not. Nothing has changed in the at-will employment law. Nothing.

No public policy can deny or disparage at-will employment law.

 

[danielpalos]

Nothing in the Unemployment Compensation programs violates the at-will employment laws. Both the employee and the employer have the exact same rights under the unemployment compensation laws.

There can be no Cause requirement in an at-will employment State without abridging at-will employment Law.

 

[danielpalos]

It does not abridge the rights of the employer or employee under the at-will employment law. Nothing in the unemployment compensation laws stop workers from quitting, prevent employers from terminating employees, or employees from going on strike.

Yes, it does. Simply requiring Cause for any public policy is an abridgement of at-will employment law.

 

[WinterBorn]

At-will employment is generally described as follows: "any hiring is presumed to be 'at will'; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals 'for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,' and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work."

Any public policy which abridges that legal doctrine is unConstitutional.

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Nothing in the unemployment compensation law abridges "At-will employment is generally described as follows: "any hiring is presumed to be 'at will'; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals 'for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,' and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work."".

Hiring is still presumed to be "at-will". Employers are still free to discharge individuals for good cause, bad cause, or no cause at all. And employees are still equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work.

 

[danielpalos]

Nothing in the unemployment compensation law abridges "At-will employment is generally described as follows: "any hiring is presumed to be 'at will'; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals 'for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,' and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work."".

Hiring is still presumed to be "at-will". Employers are still free to discharge individuals for good cause, bad cause, or no cause at all. And employees are still equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work.

Yes, and unemployment compensation must follow that legal doctrine via public policies in an at-will employment State.

 

[WinterBorn]

Requiring Cause for any public policy in an at-will employment State is an Abridgement of at-will employment law.

No, it is not. Providing a temporary benefit, paid by the employer, does not abridge any portion of the at-will employment law. There is absolutely no change in the rights of employees or employers.

 

[WinterBorn]

Yes, it does. Simply requiring Cause for any public policy is an abridgement of at-will employment law.

No, it is not. No matter how many times you repeat the same lie it does not become the truth.

 

[WinterBorn]

Yes, and unemployment compensation must follow that legal doctrine via public policies in an at-will employment State.

No, it does not. UC is not in violation of at-will employment law. No rights of any employee or employer is changed or abridged by unemployment compensation laws.

 

[danielpalos]

No, it is not. Providing a temporary benefit, paid by the employer, does not abridge any portion of the at-will employment law. There is absolutely no change in the rights of employees or employers.

Employment at-will is not a temporary benefit. For-cause criteria is an abridgment of at-will employment laws.

 

[danielpalos]

No, it is not. No matter how many times you repeat the same lie it does not become the truth.

Yes, it is.

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.