Right To Work vs. Employment at Will: what’s the difference?

October 28th, 2009. By Kristine B

Lately, I’ve been researching state employment laws (for the record, I do have a life). And I’ve come across a lot of people who are confused “right to work” and “employment at will.” Can’t say I blame them. So, this week Pleading Ignorance is setting the record straight about…

The difference between “right to work” and “employment at will”

Both “right to work” and “employment at will” are, obviously, employment terms. One has to do with hiring employees (hopefully you) the other has to do with firing employees (hopefully not you).

Right to Work 

“Right to work” laws govern hiring of employees. In a nutshell, “right to work” means that a person has the right to work for a company without being required to either join a union or financially support a union. Basically, if you live in a “right to work” state, joining a union, or paying union dues, can’t be a condition of your employment.

Even in “right to work” states, unions can still legally operate. In fact, they may even still represent all employees in grievances and negotiations. However, they can’t force a person to join the union or pay union dues if the person doesn’t want to.

Now, there are arguments both for and against “right to work” laws. The short version is that those in favor of “right to work” laws say they give employees the freedom and the right to choose whether or not to be part of a union and pay union dues. Those who are against “right to work” laws say that they cripple unions’ effectiveness and ability to negotiate on behalf of employees, giving employers the upper hand.

Not every state is a “right to work” state. In fact, approximately half the states are. That means that in the other half, a person applying for a job where the workers are unionized could be required to join that union as a requirement of obtaining the job.

Employment at Will

“Employment at will” means that either an employer or employee can end a working relationship at any time, for any reason, with no notice. That’s right. No notice. Zero. None. Nada. You can be terminated—or quit your job—on the spot.

That means if your employer doesn’t like the color of your shirt, he can fire you. If he doesn’t like how you do your hair, say good-bye to your job (okay, that’s probably not all that common, but it COULD, theoretically, happen). It kind of means that no matter how hard you work, if you upset your boss, no matter how small the incident, you could be out of a job. Bet that’s got you saying…

But…Isn’t that Discrimination?

Most states are “employment at will” states. In those states, there are very few exceptions to “employment at will” law, although the exceptions are significant. The only exceptions are that employers can’t fire anyone for reasons protected by federal legislation. That means that discriminatory firings (age, sex, religion, race…the usual suspects) are still illegal in “employment at will” states. So, you can breathe a sigh of relief if you think you’ve been fired for discriminatory reasons and, having read that last bit, thought you don’t have valid lawsuit against your employer.

Discrimination is wrong, period. Even in “employment at will” states. Even if you are wearing a lousy shirt color.

Check your Employee Manual too…

Another exception to “employment at will” is if a company’s employee manual sets out procedures that must be followed before someone’s fired. Those procedures must be followed to the letter, including possible reasons for firing a person. If a company doesn’t follow them, that company may be in violation of “employment at will” law.

People often confuse “employment at will” with “right to work.” At least now, you can set the record straight.

Tags: Employment Law, Labor Law, Pleading Ignorance

This was posted on Wednesday, October 28th, 2009 at 3:06 pm and is filed under Employment, Pleading Ignorance . Feel free to respond, or trackback. Read our comments policy.