Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

employment-at-will doctrine

Read a random definition: What is the CAN-SPAM Act?

A quick definition of employment-at-will doctrine:

The employment-at-will doctrine means that an employer or employee can end their work relationship at any time, without needing a specific reason. However, there are some exceptions to this rule. For example, an employer cannot fire an employee for reporting a work injury or for refusing to break the law. Additionally, if an employer has made promises or created expectations of job security, they may not be able to fire an employee without cause. Some states also recognize a duty of good faith and fair dealing, which means that employers cannot fire employees out of malice or bad faith.

A more thorough explanation:

Definition: Employment-at-will is an agreement between an employer and employee that states that the employment is for an indefinite period and can be terminated by either party at any time. This agreement is usually included in the employment contract.

Exceptions: Even if the employment agreement is at-will, there are certain reasons why termination could still be wrongful. These exceptions vary by state.

  • Public Policy Exception: Employers cannot terminate employees in violation of well-established public policy of the state. For example, an employee cannot be terminated for filing a workers' compensation claim after an on-the-job injury.
  • Implied Contract Exception: An employee may have an expectation of a fixed term or indefinite employment based on something the supervisor has done. This can take the form of employer's statements, an employer’s practice of only firing employees for cause, or an assertion in the employee handbook that specific termination procedures will be followed.
  • Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing: Some states recognize an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in employment relationships. Under this exception, an employer typically may not terminate an employee in bad faith or terminate an employee when the termination is motivated by malice.

Example: An employee in California is terminated after refusing to participate in illegal activities at the request of their employer. This termination would be wrongful under the public policy exception, as the employee cannot be terminated for refusing to violate the law at the employer's request.

Explanation: This example illustrates the public policy exception to the employment-at-will doctrine. Even though the employment agreement may be at-will, the employer cannot terminate the employee for refusing to participate in illegal activities. This is because it violates the well-established public policy of the state.

employment discrimination | en banc

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
yeah there are so many good cuisines in ithaca
renard99
22:31
@lilypadfrog: that’s a pity I’da be liking them all
texaslawhopefully
22:31
Only food I’m going to miss for sure if I leave Texas is texmex
22:31
waspy hasnt had thai food in ithaca yet. ithaca thai is so good
^^^^ truuuuuu
22:32
there are two major thai places and they have very similar names bc a divorced husband and wife own them lol
22:32
personally i think taste of thai is better than taste of thai express but thats just me
i had pho tho and it was really good and huge portions
texaslawhopefully
22:32
Glad they have good Thai food, I love Thai food! Can’t wait to visit :)
22:33
when tex goes to ithaca i want to come
Dkk
22:34
Crying Tiger, best Thai dish.
damn im so hungry all i had today was a curry tonkatsu and buldak
and it was a lil baby noodle cup
vvv hungry
22:36
curry tonkatsu so yummeh
22:36
whats even open rn? pizza?
CTB is it i think
22:37
is collegetown pizza not open
22:37
i used to get a slice from there or wings over at like 1am after my shift at the restaurant
Dkk
22:48
Ross Ulbricht free. God Bless Trump. Huge win.
JeremyFragrance
22:54
agreed
texaslawhopefully
22:55
This is an interesting read: https://thedispatch.com/article/birthright-citizenship-trump-implications/
Dkk
23:01
I mean, idk how it's possible to end birth right citizenship without amending the constitution because to me the 14th amendment is pretty clear about it.
ross ulbricht tried to hire a hitman to kill 5 people
i am not that sympathetic to him
Dkk
23:04
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: That might have been an FBI agent. It was most likely him and he was most likely doing it to retrieve stolen funds that corrupt FBI agents stole, but yeah moral gray area but me personally, cool with hitmen. It's not like it is uncommon to hire hitmen. I don't think the action itself is necessarily wrong but the intent behind it can be.
Dkk
23:05
Like, Boeing whistblowers being killed by hitmen = wrong but a guy hiring hitmen to retrieve stolen funds = good to me.
texaslawhopefully
23:05
@Dkk: Yeah, for sure. My guess is it'll go to SCOTUS and it'll be 8-1 or 7-2, saying that EO was unconstitutional.
Dkk
23:06
Indeed. I need a count for how many exectuive orders he has signed and how many already have pending lawsuits.
i've been away for a while what were the most recent waves? any this week?
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.