10.2190/FCTV-NTPC-NYK9-Q6PW FCTVNTPCNYK9Q6PW 119 At-Will Employment: Just Let It Go 119 131 20031021 20031021 20031021 20031021 FCTVNTPCNYK9Q6PW.pdf http://baywood.metapress.com/link.asp?target=contribution&id=FCTVNTPCNYK9Q6PW 2 DEBRA BURKE BEVERLY LITTLE Western Carolina University, Cullowhee, North Carolina Western Carolina University, Cullowhee, North Carolina In the United States, at-will employment is the bulwark of employment relationship. One estimate is that 60 percent of American workers are employed on an at-will basis [1], which according to common law, means that either the employer or the employee may terminate the employment relationship at any time, with or without cause. While this employment relationship has been recognized for over a century, it has deteriorated markedly in the past decades. The argument of this article is that, in actuality, employers have far less leeway in at-will situations than they believe. In addition, explicit at-will statements, which are meant to strengthen the employers' situation, actually increase the likelihood that employees will feel unfairly treated. Based on these two arguments, this article suggests that employers should abandon the at-will doctrine and substitute a good faith dealing with employees. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973). B. B. Dunford and D. J. Devine, Employment At-will and Employment Discharge: A Justice Perspective on Legal Actions Following Termination, Personnel Psychology, 51:4, 1998, pp. 903-935. K. H. Decker, Mandating Federal Statutory Arbitration of At-will Employment Disputes as Part of National Labor Policy, Journal of Individual Employment Rights,8:4, 2000, pp. 261-294. C. Schwoere and B. Rosen, Effects of Employment At-will Policies and Compensation Policies on Corporate Image and Job Pursuit Intentions, Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 1989, pp. 653-656. Thompson v. Price Broadcasting Co., 817 F. Supp. 1538 (D. Utah 1993). O'Connor v. Consolidated Coin Caterers Corp., 517 U.S. 308 (1996). 29 U.S.C. § 623 (f)(1) (2000). Deaver v. Texas Commerce Bank, N.A., 886 F. Supp. 578 (E.D. Tex. 1995). EEOC v. Wyoming, 460 U.S. 226 (1983). Lorillard v. Pons, 434 U.S. 575 (1978). 29 U.S.C. sec. 623 (a)(1)-(3) (1999). 29 C.F.R. sec. 1630.2(m)(2000). Hazen Paper Company v. Biggins, 507 U.S. 604 (1993). Medina-Munoz v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 896 F.2d 5 (1st Cir. 1990). J. M. Najita (ed.), A Due Process Protocol for Mediation and Arbitration of Statutory Disputes Arising Out of the Employment Relationship, Proceedings of the 48th Annual Meeting of the National Academy of Arbitrators, 1996, pp. 298-304. Foley v. Interactive Data Corp., 47 Cal.3d 654 (1988). C. J. Coleman, T. T. Haynes, and M. G. McGraw, Labor and Employment Arbitration, Ithaca, ILR Press, 1997. P. Nicolai, Rethinking Employment Law Strategies, Dispute Resolution Journal, 12, 2002, pp. 53-63. E. S. Callahan, The Public Policy Exception to the Employment At-will Rule Comes of Age, American Business Law Journal, 29:3, 1991, pp. 481-517. M. V. Roehling and D. Winters, Job Security Rights: The Effects of Specific Policies and Practices on the Evaluation of Employers, Employee Rights and Responsibilities Journal, 12:1, 2000, pp. 25-38. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Best Practices of Private Sector Employers, Available at http://www.eeoc.gov/task/practice.html, retrieved July 29, 2002. J. E. MacDonald and C. Beck-Dudley, A Natural Law Defense to the Employment Law Question: A Response to Richard Epstein, American Business Law Journal, 38:2, 2001, pp. 363-411. R. Runkel, Arbitration of Employment Disputes: The New Privatization of the Judicial System, available at www.lawmemo.com/emp/articles.arb.htm, retrieved September 25, 2002, updated December 16, 2002. D. G. Savage, Justice in Job Disputes, ABA Journal, 87:5, 2001, pp. 30-31. D. McCabe and J. Rabil, Administering the Employment Relationship: The Ethics of Conflict Resolution in Relation to Justice in the Workplace, Journal of Business Ethics, 36:2, 2002, pp. 33-49. J. Parker, Arbitration of Statutory Employment Discrimination Claims: What Hath Gilmer Wrought? Journal of Individual Employment Rights, 8:3, 1999-2000, pp. 231-244. Caton v. Leach Corp., 896 F.2d 939 (5th Cir. 1990). J. C. Telezinski, Comment, Without Warning--The Danger of Protecting "Whistle-blowers" Who Don't Blow the Whistle, Western State University Law Review, 27, (1999-2000), p. 397. T. J. St. Antoine, The Making of the Model Employment Termination Act, Washington Law Review, 69, 1994, pp. 361-382. P. R. Safran, The Model Employment Termination Act: Goodbye to Employment at Will. Available at www.paintstore.com/archives/columns/smallconcorn/scc0396.html, retrieved August 30, 2002. Uniform Law Commissioners, Model Employment Termination Act, available at http://www.nccusl.org/nccusl/uniformact_summaries/uniformacts-s-meta.asp, retrieved August 30, 2002. D. Stua, Model Employment Act (META): A Proposed Solution to Employment at Will, available at http://home.inu.net/davidstua/meta.htm, retrieved August 30, 2002. K. A. Sprang, Beware the Toothless Tiger: A Critique of the Model Employment Termination Act, American University Law Review, 43, 1994, pp. 849-932. Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Co., 610 P.2d 1330 (1980). Garibaldi v. Lucky Food Stores, Inc., 726 F.2d 1367 (1984). E. S. Callahan and T. M. Dworkin, The State of State Whistleblower Protection, American Business Law Jourml, 38:1, 2000, pp. 99-175. B. Hersey, Notes & Comments, An Unnecessary Broadening of the Public Policy Exception to the Employment-at-Will Doctrine in Washington, Washington Law Review, 76, 2001, pp. 179-188. Whirlpool Corp. v. Marshall, 445 U.S.1 (1980). Smith v. Smithway Motor Xpress, Inc., 454 N.W.2d 682 (Ia. 1990). D. A. Ballam, Employment-at-will: The Impending Death of a Doctrine, American Business Law Journal, 37:4, 2000, pp. 653-687. 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2005 (2000). K. H. Decker, Pennsylvania's Whistleblower Law's Extension to Private Sector Employees: Has the Time Finally Come to Broaden Statutory Protection for all At-Will Employees? Dusquesne Law Review, 38, 2000, pp. 723-793. Leikvold v. Valley View Community Hospital, 688 P.2d 170 (Ariz. 1984). P. Berks, Social Change and Judicial Response: The Handbook Exception to Employment-at-will, Employee Rights and Employment Policy Journal, 4, 2000, pp. 231-240. Guz v. Bechtel National Inc., 8 P.3d 1089 (Cal. 2000). Fortune v. National Cash Register Co., 364 N.E.2d 1251 (1977). S. M. Fisher, Legislative Enactment Process: The Model Employment Termination Act, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 536, 1994, pp. 72-79. C. J. Muhl, The Employment-at-will Doctrine: Three Major Exceptions, Monthly Labor Review, 2001, pp. 3-11. CAL. GOV. CODE § 12920 (Deering 1999). G. Flynn, Mandatory Arbitration Takes a Hit--But Lives, Workforce, 81:5, 2002, pp. 70-71. R. F. Wayland, J. M Clay, and P. L Payne, Employment At-will Statements: Perceptions of Job Applicants, International Journal of Manpower, 14, 1993, pp. 22-33. St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks, 509 U.S. 502 (1993).