Hello everyone. Today, I want to talk a little about employment rights and the issues within them. I have been against the employment rights for a while, and it really is getting out of hand. I am pretty certain that only employers and possibly former employers will agree with my post, and it may be disregarded. However, it is worth a shot.
So first, I want to talk about exactly how employment rights have evolved. Now, I have been in this community since 2016, so 4 years. My first position that I was given the authority to administer terminations was in the Department of Transportation as the Associate Secretary. At the time, employers could terminate for any reason they seem breaking the handbook. In addition, this power was not abused by the transportation administration. It actually resulted in a mature, professional, and highly reformed department. I wished I could provide proof of this, but it would require me to look through a bunch of boards and cards. It is important to note that employment rights existed, but nobody really used them except in the most extreme cases. I was not aware of them until I became the Deputy Secretary.
Now, I want to take a little road to the real world. If you do not like your boss, you do not stay there and keep working under them. You leave. Now, in Firestone, this can be different as if you really want to drive fire trucks you have to work for the SCFD. However, it is crucial to note that fighting for your rank or position back will not help you. You are still under their authority. You are subject to their rules. Why should you keep fighting so hard and vigorously to work under someone who dislikes you? It just seems extremely counter-productive and it provides such a headache for the department head. In addition to that, applicants somehow have rights as well? (Note the following may be inaccurate and I would like such inaccuracies to be corrected) I get that you should not deny someone just because you dislike them, but at the end of the day, is it really your department? It should be up to the department head if they want to accept you or not, and should not be subject to any civil litigation. This is how you prevent low-quality individuals from being accepted. Someoneâs incompetence can not be proven in court all the time, and when it does it never is enough. Again, itâs ridiculous fighting so hard to get into a position. Going back to my main point, in real life, if an employer sees you have a bad credit score or such alike, they may be willing to hire you. The same principle should apply in Firestone.
Now, the principle âif you donât like it, leaveâ may sound pathetic, and it has been heard by many (if you get the reference.). However, a lot of people have done this. People leave departments and the State due to their dislike for it. People should also continue to do that as well. After all, the department will suffer if it truly has an issue.
So, what now? Remove employment rights? Thatâs up for debate, but in my opinion, if an employer is clearly doing a terrible job at administering disciplinary actions without racism, sexism, etc, and has questionable actions they should most definitely be dismissed. The Governor or County Executive should be responsible for ensuring that actions are not a clear violation of moral and ethical values. We continue to see the quality of law enforcement, public employees, etc decline due to employers simply not willing to go to court over it. The court is a massive headache, and thatâs another story for another day. I have seen someone mention (forgot their name) to make employment rights under an EO. I think this is a good idea. In a bigger scope, you are agreeing to be subject to the rules your employer sets, and the EO would be the best way to approach this. The court really should not be the go-to because you want to be stubborn and not accept your mistakes. However, as this State progresses this becomes the norm.
Those who came and read everything thus far, thank you. It really is saddening to see how the quality of employees within the State slowly decrease because of these employment rights. You miss one thing in a policy or handbook, and everyone uses it to loophole it. There is no âcommon senseâ rule because people who want to abuse the employment rights fail to have any common sense. People like to blame POST, the department heads, etc, and I will not disagree â a few of the problems lay within them. However, they are so limited and have to follow a long procedure just to get a simple consequence out. It is merely unfair to those who put in relentless effort to keep a good record, be competent, etc that others who violate rules fail to get the proper consequence if any. Over time, these people will also start breaking rules and use employment rights in their favor. Next thing you know, weâre a state full of idiots and incompetent individuals.
There are probably other points I missed, and I may continue to add. I am very open to whatever change is presented, as long as the change can be agreed upon at least a majority of employers. Feel free to leave your thoughts below. You may agree, you may disagree. I do not mind, just do not be toxic.
Cheers,
EC
Smh