Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is it legal for an employer to fire you for talking about...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
KareBear Donating Member (143 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:07 PM
Original message
Is it legal for an employer to fire you for talking about...
Is it legal for your employer to fire you for talking about unionization if done outside of work hours and off of the employers property?

I've been asked by a few people about this, and it seems that noone is quite sure what their rights are on it. The feeling is everyone would just be fired on the spot no questions asked. Even if they couldn't fire for unionization talk, it seems they could fire for anything else their minds could think of.

The people inquiring are in Missouri, so keep that in mind. I believe it is one of those infamous "Right to Work" states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Dr.Phool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
1. It's not legal
But more than likely, they'll find some other excuse to justify it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MnFats Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:12 PM
Response to Original message
2. no and NO!
Edited on Sat Jan-29-05 01:13 PM by MnFats
federal law permits such activity, protects it in fact.
i went through a union organizing campaign once. the employer almost always will play dirty.

in my case, for example, management made all kinds of offhand comments (it seemed that way - in fact it was an organized part of the anti-organizing drive) about how we would all be fired. Of course it was bullshit but it scared off a lot of people.....be prepared for a big fight if you go forward. From management's point of view, it's worth almost any cost to keep a union out. good luck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
notadmblnd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
3. No, they can not.
they can't fire you for talking about it on your lunch or breaks either. have you approached a union about your shop unionizing or are you just talking about unions?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KareBear Donating Member (143 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. No nothing that formal
But they have cut pay for three consecutive years, cut manpower when there already wasn't enough, and shifted schedules to weird times to cover the lack of manpower. There has been spontaneous talk of presenting a "unified front" to management to demand better treatment. Noone excpects the person who is talking about that to be there much longer even though I think a lot of us agree we need that kind of bargaining power. People have been fired for MUCH less.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kool Aid Donating Member (4 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
4. Right to Work State
In a right to work state your employer does not have to give you a reason for termination. So I guess it would not be against the law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
prairierose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Which is why I call therm...
"right to be fired" states. those laws are for the benefit of business not workers. I live in one.

:grr:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CanOfWhoopAss Donating Member (776 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. AKA Hire at Will
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PowerToThePeople Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. Yup Right-to-Work states are slave states
I worked in Idaho for many years. It was right-to-work state. They can get rid of you for ANY reason they want to for at any time. Also, there are some anti-union laws in these states-such that it is illegal for unions to try and organize people. Grassroots is only way and they will just fire the people who start the talks and scare the rest of sheep into compliancy. You need to get organized to change the right to work laws. Right-to-work states are the last slave states in the country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Actually those states are "Employment at Will"
Which basically means that the employer can fire an employee for any reason as long as it is not covered under state or federal law.

They could say your fired because your 1 minute late for work or your not dressed right.

If you belong to a union then the contract supercedes "Employment at Will" because procedures are in place that have to be followed. Instead of being fired you might get a verbal warning or a few days off. Sometimes you can file a grievance and get paid if it is settled.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. No, that is 'At will' employment
'Right to Work' mean that workers can choose wheather or not to pay union dues at a unionized work site.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KareBear Donating Member (143 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. Yup you guys are all right, its At-Wil not Right-To-Work
I had the terms confused I guess. Though I am really surprised this isn't a "Right-To-Work" state as I've always heard it was. This must be a commonly confused concept.

In any case, its still not a good thing :) From what I'm reading they could fire someone here if they walked in wearing a yellow shirt, and the manager didn't like the color yellow. There doesn't need to be a reason as long as it doesn't blatently (read proveably) violate a protected class.

This isn't that great of news.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karlrschneider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
10. Here's a good link for info on this
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karlrschneider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
12. MO isn't one n/t

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 17th 2014, 01:33 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC