1) Define and briefly explain the logic behind the concept of employment-at-will.
2) How do the laws surrounding organized labor support, modify, or conflict with this concept?
3) Is it possible that one approach to staffing would be preferable over the other, or is it dependent on specific circumstances faced by the organization? Explain.
Logic behind the concept of employment-at-will
When English common law was most prevalently used in the U.S., employment contracts. This type of employee is known as an employee-at-will. This type of work arrangement is known as employment-at-will and means that the employee can quit at any time, for any reason, and the employer can terminate the employee at any time and for any reason. This type of arrangement offers immense flexibility for the employee. That was especially important in times when relocating for more plentiful food or work opportunities was common. However, this arrangement doesn’t offer job security. That has become more important as fewer families have migrant workers. Employment-at-will arrangements still exist. Many hourly and certainly many minimum wage employees are at-will employees. In fact, all employees are presumed to be at-will-employees unless the employee has a legally binding agreement with the employer that the employee can only be fired for good cause.
Free trade is a trade where countries carries out economic activities ‘without restrictions or barrier such as import and export tariffs’, barrier to market entry and policies (Johnston, Gregory, & Smith, 2011, free trade). Many countries have reaped benefits from free trade and especially developing countries. Some benefits include improvement in infrastructures, expanded markets, access to technologies, free movement of labour and capital, investment, and political relations in form of integrations. These benefits have played a major role in the economic developments of developing countries. However, some countries argue against free trade claiming that it is a burden to developing countries and they object it. Some arguments against include exploitation of developing countries by industrialised, environmental pollution, unemployment of domestic workers, and underperformance of domestic industries thus affecting the country’s economic growth. Free trade has positively impacted to developing countries by stimulating their economic development goals such as millennium development goals thus it can be said to be realistic in the real world.
Free trade was found to work out for countries such as Japan, South Korea, China, other East Asia countries, and most of the developed countries in the world. Trade liberalization led to development of these countries and to attainment of their current level of ‘developed countries’ in the world. The countries formed ‘free trade and economic partnership agreements that helped in negotiations of trade across borders was important in facilitating trade,’ technical support, services, environmental and social issues (Zeng, 2010 p. 651). The guidelines helped countries to carry out trade in a defined environment that prevented them from exploiting each other in terms of natural resources. As a result, the countries realised developments. This has also worked out for developing countries such as those in sub-Sahara Africa for example Egypt. Moreover, free trade agreements encourage foreign direct investments in developing countries increasing inward revenues to these countries. The increased revenues to these countries are channelled to development projects such infrastructures and improving social amenities to citizens. In addition, foreign direct investments create employment for domestic workers thus helping developing countries to lower their unemployment rates. This is one of the achievements that have contributed greatly to shifting of countries from undeveloped cycles to becoming developed. For example, foreign direct investment has contributed to development of China. China is among the developing countries that’ has the largest reserve of foreign direct investments’ (Chen, & Emile, 2013 p. 120). China has attracted many foreign investors due to reduced market barriers such as ‘uniform tax for both domestic and foreign investors’ and trade liberalization resulting to increase in its gross domestic product (Davies, 2013 p. 11). As a result, China’s econ