>need a job to not starve or end up on the streets >you can get fired the moment it's no longer profitable to keep you around or if you make a joke the boss didn't like >for some reason if you decide to quit it's considered "impolite" if you don't give two weeks notice
Something something work mobility something stimulate the economy.
>>for some reason if you decide to quit it's considered "impolite" if you don't give two weeks notice Protip: Not every situation where a person might quit or otherwise resign from a position will involve resentment or holding a grudge.
Say for instance you found a job with better pay, better benefits, etc. You don't want to destroy a reference that would be useful on your resume. You also likely don't want to stiff your previous employer or inconvenience him given that he will have to go through the process of replacing you.
Not giving notice means you are going to leave a vacancy behind that could lead to a financial loss for your now prior employer.
>Why is this allowed? Clearly you've never hired anyone, nor have you ever even thought about what it's like to have employees. You are a fucking baby.
Back to work goy
>will someone please think of the job creators™ oh the humanity so the boss can drop me on a whim and ruin me financially but I'm supposed to worry about somewhat slightly inconveniencing him by not providing him two weeks notice?
It seems like the baby is you
I wonder whose behind this post
Stop thinking about this go--guy! Hehe haven't you heard of the latest negro on welfare! How terrible!
>so the boss can drop me on a whim and ruin me financially In most states yes. But what could be the likely causes of him deciding to do that? Say for instance he caught you stealing company funds, dicking his daughter, etc.
If he's willing to just dump you without notice you either did something worth such a response, or you were too expendable in the first place.
There may also be the cold harsh reality that the company falls on hard times financially and has to choose between going into bankruptcy or insolvency, or choosing to let a few employees go. That choice is to put some employees out of work, or all of the employees out of work.
You're also skipped out on discussing severance packages. These vary by state also. Employers in some states can fire you at will, but may still have to provide 2 weeks wages as soon as they do.
Maybe you should work harder at making yourself worth employing. Or maybe you might want to consider a position that is less likely to have employment volatility.
These are all normal factors to consider when finding a job. Larger companies are far more willing to randomly lay employees off. But smaller companies also have a higher rate of going bankrupt. >but I'm supposed to worry about somewhat slightly inconveniencing him by not providing him two weeks notice? Again, you jumped over the part where I outlined many other contexts in which you would quit. People don't unilaterally quit or leave a position because they hated working there. If you want to burn your bridges every time you cross them, go right ahead. Walk out of work one day and just don't come back. But don't expect that employer to be useful as a reference when you're looking for other positions.
Don't forget, your company can declare bankruptcy, and straight up not have to pay you for your work, before letting you go.
Varies by state but yeah, ideally the relationship between employer and employee is on equal footing.
>be me >all I want is my own business >think about this every day >also read and learn and shit >you're an idiot boomer
Just die already.
Don't you realize? The company has your best interests at heart!
or to make half a billion instead of a full billion for a year, but oy vey that would be anuddah shoah
LawFag here. You're coming at this all wrong, OP. Employment is a contractual obligation. Each party owes the other notice of the intention to terminate the contract. If an employer terminates the employee with no notice and no reason given, the employee can take it to court and get pay in lieu of notice easily enough.
When an employee quits suddenly, the employer has the right to do the same. It's not about "impolite", it's a contractual obligation.
However, in most circumstances when a minimum wage earning unskilled or semi-skilled worker quits with no notice, the employer won't be bothered to take the time to sue the employee for that notice period. The employee is easily replaced. But the employer could, and if they did then they'd likely win.
So the question isn't "why is this allowed?". It's "why don't you understand the reality of the situation?". Are you expecting the police to show up and charge the employer with some kind of criminal offence, and force the employer to rehire? It doesn't happen that way.
When there's a breach of contract, either side is free to take it to civil court for damages. Wage slaves generally don't because they don't stand to gain much when there's a sudden termination, and neither does the employer in a reverse situation when the employee quits suddenly for no reason. But the legal rights to do so are there.
This is a mind twister for you? lol millenials
I was the person who wrote the software for the assembly lines at my workplace.
Literally irreplaceable because they were too cheap to hire another IDPS person for me to train.
I laughed when I got fired for taking 5 vacation days (approved 2 months in advance by my manager). I was sitting at home for a whole few hours before I got a call. "We need you to come back in."
So no, companies don't always evaluate employees based on how useful they are to a company. Sometimes legislation that forces companies to keep employees doing a satisfactory job can be good for the economy overall.
You're the problem you fucking autist.
blah blah blah my totally rigid interpretation of Da Rules says that people have to act against their best interests because blah blah blah lobbyists and jews and money.
>If an employer terminates the employee with no notice and no reason given, the employee can take it to court and get pay in lieu of notice easily enough. but that's wrong, faggot
Thanks for contributing to the dialogue, FuckFace.
This is a legal question. If you want to call me a jew blah blah blah autist blah blah blah, then go ahead.
Until you understand "the system" you'll find that it's always working against you.
>You're and idiot boomer Nope, I'm 34. But who cares.
Businesses don't exist to provide anything for you. They exist solely to maintain their own existence through enough profit to keep them afloat and expand when needed.
You're all whining that business is cold-hearted. That's old fucking news. Yeah, they do that too. What do you expect? Business isn't setup to treat you as valuable. You are just another cog that can be leased for a given price per hour.
>you're the problem No, you're just being a bitch. If you want different rules you'll have to petition for them to be changed. Good luck.
>At-will employment Sure, which applies to the states that have those laws. But not all of them do.
I never implied that every company makes reasonable or even sound decisions when hiring or firing employees. But you do exemplify my advice in that you made yourself indispensable enough that they had to reverse their decision to fire you because they discovered after the fact that they could operate without you.
>sometimes And sometimes it isn't. There are very few universal answers when it comes to business.
Then maybe you alt-right morons should support some workers rights, maybe even get your head around the idea that a labour union might be a good thing.
I'm not wrong. Fuck you. If the employment contract states that neither side owes the other notice of termination, then that's fine. But you have to know how to read first.
Thank you Jesus someone is not fully retarded
Why should I care how the guy who stacks shit feel about his job? If he doesn't like it I can get someone else willing and able in less than a day. If he doesn't like it then he can try not being a loser that stacks shit all day.
BURN THE RICH
EAT THEIR FLESH
THEY WILL LITERALLY KICK YOU TO THE CURB THE MOMENT THEIR PROFIT DROPS 0.01% A QUARTER
KILL THEM ALL
If I put in 50% effort, my work is still pretty damn good and there won't be any production problems.
If I put in 100% effort (which includes me being mentally fatigued and unable to do shit outside of work), the factory will run without issues even when I'm not there, including being a smoothly operating facility for the next employee.
If I get the same salary for both levels of effort, the same job security (none) and I can get a job anywhere within a month, what incentive do I have to put in 100% effort?
Extrapolate your answer across all employees who deal with highly technical problems, because it's going to apply to a lot of people.
>be entitled piece of shit kid born after 95. >resent being "forced" to do any work because cuddled - and raised in non masculine environment (typical special snowflake). >ungrateful to employer, does only enough to not be fired - and bitches about it anyway. >complains about other workers despite not actually being better. >think you are the smartest person in the room - even though you work at some big box store and have no real value to society. >lie to yourself so much you think you could work at SpaceX if only they knew how cool you actually were. >Test scores not impressive, took easy courses in college - or still are taking easy courses. >Thinks lack of motivation is a point of pride because "not a mindless drone" or other bullshit excuse for being lazy. >Not tall, not /fit/, not wealthy, not actually popular.
Is this right OP?
>Clearly you've never hired anyone, nor have you ever even thought about what it's like to have employees. You are a fucking baby. Pretty much. For some reason it seems like the lower class is incapable of empathy.
Empathy is a byproduct of intelligence. I'm not talking about being an extrovert verses an introvert, I'm talking about the ability to put yourself in someone else's place - to see things from an alternative point of view. Niggers are so violent because they have lower IQ... yes. But the reason low IQ leads to violence is lack of empathy. Plus "living in the moment," not planning ahead, not properly gauging risk verses reward, etc., etc.
So yes, the poorer - lower class people are often less - and oddly enough accuse the wealthy of the same thing.
>alt-right >anti-union Cuckservatives. The term you were looking for was not "alt-right", it was "cuckservative". That is, it's the opinion of mainstream conservatives that labor unions are bad.
You're right. I stand corrected.
You get unemployment benefits if you get laid off due to economic reasons.
>rich elites destroy entire economies and fire thousands of people to protect their bottom line >its the poor who lack empathy if they don't give in two weeks notice if they quit ?????
am I being memed on here?
You're not required to give a two weeks notice, why does anyone thinks this. You only care about the two weeks notice if you want the employer to be a reference.
The solution is profit sharing
Are you literally retarded comrade?
>you can get fired the moment it's no longer profitable to keep you around or if you make a joke the boss didn't like
You have to work in order to make yourself needed in the company, to become a vital component. If you slack around ofc they will fire you in a moment's notice.
>for some reason if you decide to quit it's considered "impolite" if you don't give two weeks notice
No, its because its the law. To get your shit done so you can move to your next job without complicating things. There is a lot of work behind your shitty ass job.
Now all commies go kill yourselves.
>rich elites destroy entire economies and fire thousands of people to protect their bottom line Yeah, because rich people love to destroy the economies that build and house their wealth. Sure, the Dow Jones has never been higher, but... oh nevermind.
Firing people is something you do when you lack empathy - it is done to protect other employees from the business going under in response to dead weight and poor bottom line. Also, what about the shareholders? Fuck them? Nope, the shareholders are people too, and they deserve sound business practices. Markets are dynamic, and getting laid off is not personal.
>its the poor who lack empathy if they don't give in two weeks notice if they quit I didn't say the poor lack empathy "because" they don't give two weeks notice. I said, in general, poor people are not a bright as middle class and rich people. Which is true beyond a reasonable doubt. I then said that people that are not as bright in general - often lack empathy. That is also true - empathy is a product of human intelligence.
No, the guy you're responding to has a lot of leverage against his employer that he isn't using. The solution is to use that leverage to renegotiate his contract.
2 weeks notice is convience to your labor overlords.