Arizona - "Right to Work" State
I know Arizona is a "Right to Work" State.
Does this mean an employer can terminate your employment at any time or any reason?
Answers (1)
right to work often confused with at will employment
People often confuse the concept of "right to work" with "at will" employment. They have nothing to do with one another.
Indeed, Arizona is a right to work state. This means that Arizona has a statute that forbids an employer and a union from agreeing to require union membership as a condition of employment. As a result, unions have a difficult time getting a foothold in many workplaces. Even when a work group (known as a "bargaining unit") votes to have a union as its exclusive bargaining agent, individual members of that unit are not required to belong to the union. As a result, the union does not enjoy the same degree of loyalty among the employees that typically exists in states where union membership can be mandated as part of the collective bargaining agreement. Right to work states like Arizona are often regarded as more friendly to employers, which is easily interpreted as anti-union or anti-employee rights.
Arizona also recognizes the concept of "at will" employment, which means that employees in the private sector can generally be terminated for any reason or no reason, unless the employee has a contract that provides otherwise. Most states recognize this concept in one form or another, but courts have developed numerous exceptions to this presumed understanding between employer and employee. The courts in Arizona began to recognize the idea that employment policies in handbooks or personnel manuals could be used as evidence of an implicit promise by an employer that it would not terminate an employee without a good reason. But then the Chamber of Commerce lobbied the legislature heavily for several years and succeeded in having a law passed that protected employers from such claims. The law, euphemistically named the Employment Protection Act, requires that any contract altering the presumption that employment is terminable at will must be in writing and signed by the employer. The only employees likely to have such protection are high level executives and unionized workers.
posted by Francis Fanning | Jan 10, 2004 5:14 PM [EST]
People often confuse the concept of "right to work" with "at will" employment. They have nothing to do with one another.
Indeed, Arizona is a right to work state. This means that Arizona has a statute that forbids an employer and a union from agreeing to require union membership as a condition of employment. As a result, unions have a difficult time getting a foothold in many workplaces. Even when a work group (known as a "bargaining unit") votes to have a union as its exclusive bargaining agent, individual members of that unit are not required to belong to the union. As a result, the union does not enjoy the same degree of loyalty among the employees that typically exists in states where union membership can be mandated as part of the collective bargaining agreement. Right to work states like Arizona are often regarded as more friendly to employers, which is easily interpreted as anti-union or anti-employee rights.
Arizona also recognizes the concept of "at will" employment, which means that employees in the private sector can generally be terminated for any reason or no reason, unless the employee has a contract that provides otherwise. Most states recognize this concept in one form or another, but courts have developed numerous exceptions to this presumed understanding between employer and employee. The courts in Arizona began to recognize the idea that employment policies in handbooks or personnel manuals could be used as evidence of an implicit promise by an employer that it would not terminate an employee without a good reason. But then the Chamber of Commerce lobbied the legislature heavily for several years and succeeded in having a law passed that protected employers from such claims. The law, euphemistically named the Employment Protection Act, requires that any contract altering the presumption that employment is terminable at will must be in writing and signed by the employer. The only employees likely to have such protection are high level executives and unionized workers.
posted by Francis Fanning | Jan 10, 2004 5:14 PM [EST]
Answer This Question
Sign In to Answer this Question
Related Questions with Answers