Sue for anything but sackings. Why is it this way in the US?

The US is probably one of the most litigious societies in the western world where lawyers make a fortune out of everybody suing everybody else for something or anything; where many lawsuits definitely left common sense at the door. Why is it then that you have virtually no employment rights? It seems that employees can be sacked 'at will' instantly for no reason and have no redress, when their career and livelihood is at stake. How is it that you can sue a restaurant when you've burned yourself with your own coffee because you're clumsy, but you can't sue an employer who sacks you for no good reason?

Good question, mate.

Laws were developed by consensus by those in power and that is what they deemed 'just.'

I will add something not often mentioned and that nobody yet posted.

Be aware you can sue if you are terminated but most lawyers would not take a case on contingency basis and most people in the USA would not have the money to pay the lawyer up front. They just lost their job.

Even if they had a viable case they have no money to pay the lawyer so they just get another job.

Lawyers take the injury cases because in most instances an insurance company will pay for the defense and settlement of the injury cases and has every incentive to predict what a court would award and offer a bit less to the lawyer in exchange to get the money quick.

Sometimes a lawyer will take an employment law on contingency for some reason including publicity for their firm, a clear and convincing case or out of kindness (very rare since they have bills also).

There are forces trying to unionize all employees. A unionized employee works under a contract and there is a system of dur process to 'sack' someone.

Anyone else works at will. I know of no lobby working to change state or federal law to disallow firings at will.

That would be strongly resisited.

Perhaps you can come here and start one, have the laws changed and be our hero ?

: )

The other half of the "sue" thing is winning. Some people sue a lot, but unless there is grounds, they don't win. Usually. Because of juries, sometimes someone who sues wins when they don't really deserve it. One hears in the news the "unusual" cases.

The US pursued a different path than European nations as regards employee rights. Unless there is a union or other contract, the idea is that a person hires someone for their mutual benefit, until one of the party terminates the relationship. That means, as an employee, you can quit at any time, and as an employer, they can terminate you at any time.

There are hire and fire "at will" laws in many states. Rich employers contribute to congress peoples' campaigns and so they get these sort of laws slipped through the system. You can only get a job at a temp agency for about 6 weeks and then quit working for them (but don't actually say you quit, just don't take any more work from them by not answering the phone) and file for unemployment due to "lack of work". They won't fight it because the unemployment will go against your employer from the year before...even if you quit or if they fired you...as long as your last job "laid you off"...so to speak.

I would say get a good employment lawyer and a good union rep, people should be accountable for their behaviour. Make sure that the job centre and other agencies that line up job interviews for this employer are aware of bad practice.

Actually, you can. However, employers usually only fire their bad employees, so when the employee tries to sue, the employer usually has a good reason.

I totally agree with you.. us people have lawyers for everything its so rediculous and way out of hand. and we wonder whats going on with our country..

New American dream; sue and get rich.

It's true...laws are almost always on the side of the employer...that's why unions started.

If you don't work with in a company with a union, the employer can not only hire who they want, but also fire who they want...

I'm sure in the most litigious country in the world, many disgruntled ex-employees have tried to sue, but failed...because...you hire who you want..you fire who you want....

If it happens often enough...disgruntled current employees who are worried about how they are treated vote in a union....
(i'm not advocating for unions...though this is definitely a strong point..and a weak point...because unions make jobs safe for both good and bad employees....)