There seems to always be a debate over employees’ rights, and how much is too much or little. I believe that the best way to delegate employees’ rights is to make sure employees can have as many rights as the Constitution provides without harming the financial condition of the company.
With this topic comes the constant struggle of power between the employees and employers. Appeasing an employee’s right sometimes can be detrimental to the company’s financial well-being. On the other hand though, employees can take advantage of their employees and strip their rights or discriminate against them. Employers have the upper hand in this battle with the employment-at-will doctrine. This doctrine says that an employee is at the will of the employer and can be fired for any reason, and that the employer does not need to state his or her reasons for releasing someone. I do believe that this policy is very acceptable because the employer deserves this power. Employees are by nature subject to the employer and company and have been granted an opportunity to get paid. If they get out of line and begin to hurt the company financially because of their actions, then there is no reason why they should have the same job. There are of course exceptions to this rule for discrimination in terms of sex, race, and religion. These rules are enforced by a government agency, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). I agree that it is unethical and unfair for an employer to discriminate against for any of the reasons listed above because these factors are hard to control and/or should not be controlled because of their importance to the individual. However, if the employee misses a substantial amount of time and no longer contributes to the business than I think that he or she may be fired or relocated.
Another claim I am making, is that employee’s should be granted the rights stated in the 1st Amendment and other basic human rights as long as it does not harm the company. An example of an employee’s first amendment rights getting in the way of a company is if an employee decides to rant about his company on Facebook or other social networking sites. This should not be allowed by the employer because it could cause considerable financial harm to the company. In 2008, thirteen employees were fired by the airline company, Virgin Atlantic, for calling their passengers” chavs” on Facebook. It was the right move on behalf of Virgin Atlantic to fire the employees. Those who argue that this is a violation of their freedom of speech have not properly considered the employer/employee relationship. The employees gave up various rights when they accepted the job in order for the company to function. In this situation the employees were not simply speaking as a citizen, but as an employee instead. Their actions may have caused considerable harm to the reputation of Virgin Atlantic, and since they are harming their company then there is no valid reason for why they should keep their jobs? By accepting employment to work for Virgin Atlantic there are implied duties to give up some rights and make sure they get the job done without causing harm to the company.
Employees’ rights should be kept intact to protect the employees, but can be limited by the company if the employees' rights get in the way of the company’s financial success.