sure it is. keep telling yourself that. no one is going to pay a bunch of bums to sit on their asses.

I don't have a problem setting a moral example of fully complying with at-will employment doctrine and state at-will employment laws.

This isn't a religious moral issue, but a legal issue at common law, concerning standing precedent already established.

At-will employment doctrine already exists. State at-will employment laws already exist.

It is only a matter of complying with that existing doctrine and those state laws.

except its not that simple. because at will employment does not translate to at will unemployment. seriously dude. thats not hard

Why not? It complies with that doctrine and those state laws.

dude this is like the 200th time we've gone round and round with this.

employees can quit or get fired at will for good cause bad cause or no cause. If the company is forced to let them go ie they aren't fired for "good cause" they are entitled to limited benefits to help them stay on their feet while they look for a new job. these benefits end after a certain period of time.
however if they are fired for "good cause" they aren't entitled to a dime.

thats how it works. what is so hard to grasp here?

It is a matter of equity.

We already have a compelling interest of a war on poverty.

What justification is there for for-cause stipulations in any at-will employment state?

Lack of compliance with laws by the government only breeds disrespect for the law by the people.

the war on poverty is like the war on drugs. unconstitutional and a constant, useless drain on our resources.

what for cause? If youre laid off you get unemployment. if not fuck you. thats how it works

Whos not complying? The laws for unemployment are clear.

Good Day

What justification is there for for-cause stipulations in any at-will employment state?

I only agree with you on the war on drugs. The war on poverty can act as a form of economic stimulus similar to that of command economies which experience less volatile business cycles, but with our social contract and privileges and immunities.

what for cause? dude there is no for cause. unemployment laws are very clear.

communism = bad for the econmy. ex: soviet russia. ex: china before they FINALLY added some captialism in the right place.
cuba. etc etc etc

I agree with you that at-will employment law is very clear. At-will employment doctrine is also very clear.

In principal, an employee should be able to quit or otherwise cease work, for good-cause, bad-cause, or no-cause at all; with no liability. Any liability could be considered a for-cause stipulation, implied in fact.

Simply requiring good-cause on the part of the employee under at-will employment doctrine is a form of friction in the market for labor and a liability for the employee, who may not have recourse to unemployment compensation, while complying with at-will employment and state at-will employment laws.

We have the compelling interest of a War on Poverty that should indicate where our priorities on individual liberty should be.

and at will employment doctrine, has nothing to do with unemployment benefits. they are two seperate concepts. What is so hard to understand about that?

You may be missing the point about unemployment benefits being denied or disparaged, by resorting to for-cause employment stipulations, in an at-will employment state; without having to prove for-cause employment.

its got nothing to do with at will employment. at will employment simply states that you can quit or strike, or be hired or fired at will with no penalties (ie hey you quit without giving notice pay me money). thats all it say.

the no penalties part does NOT extend to unemployment benefits as those are NOT a right, nor are they pre-existing in the time you are employed.

How do you justify for-cause employment stipulations from any EDD office in an at-will employment state; without having to prove for-cause employment?

In other words, can any organ of a State, choose to disregard the laws of that same State concerning at-will employment?

Can you cite any statute that provides an exemption for EDD?

Why shouldn't EDD offices in any at-will employment State not have to obey the same laws as everybody else.

And again i shall unto thee grasshopper, at will employment has nothing to do with receiving unemployment benefits.

Your argument is weak