Continuation from class discussion..
So I was wondering during class, does being hired at an organization BEFORE a policy comes into effect make any difference in terms of accountability? I'm just thinking that in realms other than employment law we see this occurring - such as when universities change graduation requirements but only hold incoming freshman accountable for the changes. Does anyone know of any examples of this in employment law? Would this be more fair or less fair that imposing new requirements on all employees regardless of hire date?
posted by mel at
6:38 PM
2 Comments:
I think it would be unfair to the students used to the standard requirements to change them halfway through school. While this does not pertain necessarily to employment law, I know that when high schools change their grade point average scales that it only applies to the incoming freshmen. I feel that it would be unfair for an employment standpoint to in placing the burden of new policies on employees used to the current company policies.
Employment at will is relevant here. In general, changes in policy can be and are applied to current employees the same as new employees, because there is no contractual expectations that things like those policies won't change. Employee is free to leave if she doesn't like it and her continued employment is an indication that she has approved of the new policy.
[By the way, that was very watered down legal theory. I could have been much more precise, but would have been much more long-winded. But I hope this makes some sense.]
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home