Take it out, or else!!!

HireFire01

Quick question, we had a highly-paid consultant in to promote, union avoidance to our management group. During his lecture, he strongly advised that we remove our "employment-at-will" statement from our employee handbook.

His argument was that if a union were to come organize our shop, they would use that statement against us......telling our employees they really have no job security, b/c we can fire them for any reason (which we all know employment-at-will" really doesn't exist in our litigious society!)

Any comments on this issue?

Balloonman

Personally I think he is nuts. If you have treated employees right and not fired them for no reason they will not feel that way. Who is your consultant? I am curious.
My $0.02 worth.
DJ The Balloonman

ray a

I've been to union avoidance seminars where it was recommended "Employment at Will" needs to be in the handbook.

Betty I_O

I agree with the other respondents . . . don't take the "employment at Will"
language out! You didn't indicate in your posting whether this "consultant" was a labor attorney--just curious.

Pork

HERE IS ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE "ATTORNEY DAWGS" out to get in your HR pocket. They make lots of money in creating issues that only they have the solution, beginning with a complete redo of your employee handbook. Not only keep in in, but discard his calling card so you will not draw upon his wisdom again! PORK

mwild31

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 07-31-03 AT 06:08PM (CST)[/font][p]"telling our employees they really have no job security, b/c we can fire them for any reason (which we all know employment-at-will" really doesn't exist in our litigious society!)"


I agree with everyone else - and I don't believe his argument is anywhere near strong enough to even support his position to take the 'at-will' status out. Too much damage is done if you take 'at-will' out...

Margaret Morford

I would never remove your employment-at-will language. However, I'd word it so that the union couldn't use it against you. I'd use language like the following:

"Nothing contained in this policy manual or in any other materials or information distributed by the organization creates a contract of employment between an employee and [Organization name]. Employment is on an at-will basis. This means that employees are free to resign their employment at any time, for any reason, and [Organization name] retains that same right."

Margaret Morford
theHRedge
615-371-8200
[email]mmorford@mleesmith.com[/email]
[url]http://www.thehredge.net[/url]

Don D

Like most consultants, he spoke from both sides of his mouth. He was right and he was 'wrong'. He was right in saying that a union organizer will artfully use things like that 'against you'. Of course one would. But thats no reason to remove it from the handbook. It's just another piece of an organizer's scare tactics and fear campaign. It should stay in the handbook, although it's absence would not mean that you can't exercise the at-will doctrine. If a serious, energetic, forked-tongue organizer takes ANY handbook that ANY of us has, he can yellow-hi-lite 40 things he can slant the union's way when he addresses the crowd. It's just snake-oil-sales 101.

lynn2008

I agree with he respondents leave it in.

I am preparing management training in union avoidance, and have been reviewing the UAW, UFCW, Teamsters and other websites to understand the enemy. (I fought the egg sucking dogs for 15+ years, and am now happily in a non-union facility for 6 years.)

Know your enemy, and you are ALL correct - they use the entire handbook and spin it worse than a previous president's staff.

Crout

C'mon, don't sugar-coat it lynn. Tell us how you really feel.

mwild31

:DD

After reading your reply I realized that I haven't laughed that hard in a long time - 'egg sucking dogs' - I love it and I'm going to use it!

ray a

They say the ones who are the most strongly opposed to smoking are former smokers. I think the same applies to unions. My boss worked for nearly 30 years for a major auto manufacturer and was intimately involved in unions. Everything we do now has union-avoidance in mind.

mwild31

Fortunately for me, I've never worked with unions (sad for my resume though x;-)). I just can't stand their politics and how they influence and set the laws in Washington State.

Don D

I've been away for several days and when I happened back across this thread, "Take it out or else", I thought it must be something about the Cobey Bryant accusations.

Egg Suckin' Dogs is an old one in the South. It carries with it exactly the level of disdain and disrespect as it sounds like it does. But to state it correctly, one must leave the 'g' off suckin'. And, oh yes, you must also pronounce it Dawgs. I think the correct visual is an old coon-hound, eaten up with ticks and fleas, lying in the soft dirt up under a cool wooden porch, scratchin' one ear and lickin' egg shells somebody chunked out the back door with this mornings biscuits.

ray a

You know Don, I was taken to task elsewhere for referring to your southern accent.

Pattie

This is great - now I have a new name to use for the unions I work with -- four of them -- unfortunately! It also gives me a new visual to keep in my head when I have to deal with them, instead of the "urge to kill" that keeps popping up every time they come to my office!

Eroj

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 08-06-03 AT 09:49AM (CST)[/font][p]Damn you're good. I ain't herd dat sense I leff
Looseeanna.