Employment at Will

(redirected from At-will)
Also found in: Legal, Wikipedia.

Employment at Will

A form of employment in which either the employee or the employer may terminate employment with or without cause and with or without notice. For example, an employee may quit as soon as he/she finds a better job. Likewise, the employer may fire an employee even if he/she comes to work on time and performs diligently. Employment at will is not allowed in all jurisdictions and it is restricted even where it exists. For example, an employer ordinarily may not fire a worker on racial or religious grounds.
References in periodicals archive ?
Refraining from seeking other employment cannot amount to detrimental reliance unless the at-will employee, in relying on the promise, actually rejected employment offers.
It is true that as an at-will employer, you're under no obligation to explain the reason for a termination, whether during or after a trial service period.
Therefore, it's a good idea to reiterate within your disciplinary policy that you are an at-will employer.
While not all States have laws as supportive as Massachusetts for at-will employees, this could well create some momentum for similarly compensated executives who have been terminated to avoid the vesting of their valuable stock options.
The acknowledgment should also reiterate the at-will relationship, and that the handbook does not create a contract of employment.
In Indiana there are some limited exceptions to the at-will doctrine as it relates to individuals terminated from employment.
Recently, in 2012, the Court of Appeals once again declined to add an exception to the at-will doctrine, and instead emphatically reaffirmed the doctrine as the law in New York State.
The new workers could enter the country under contract to a specific employer or under an at-will status that would allow them to work for several employers.
Even if a business is an at-will employer, it should always have a legitimate business reason for a termination, whether it is poor performance, misbehavior, violation of company policy, etc.
The court noted that although an at-will employee may be terminated at any time, with or without cause, there was a genuine question of fact to be decided; to wit, was the nurse the subject of retaliatory termination?
Haun alleged, inter alia, that the hospital was guilty of: 1) wrongful termination in violation of public policy, 2) wrongful termination in violation of the specific intent exception to Pennsylvania's default employee at-will doctrine, and 3) in the alternative, tortious interference with contract by the defendants.
There is a long list of limits to an employer's right to terminate an employee at-will.