|
|
|
|
|
|
by shados
3556 days ago
|
|
|
Legal issues aside (and those are real), there's the morality aspect to it. Most companies I've worked for had people who thought firing someone was immoral unless they did something criminal. Essentially, its the company's fault for messing up in the hire process, and the employee should not have to suffer the consequences. So the employee stays in anything but the most extreme case. Freagin sucks. |
|
|
But, as with most negatives in this discussion, overblown.
> Most companies I've worked for had people who thought firing someone was immoral unless they did something criminal. Essentially, its the company's fault for messing up in the hire process, and the employee should not have to suffer the consequences. So the employee stays in anything but the most extreme case.
That is a ridiculous position, IMO. While those people would probably consider me a sociopath, I don't see any moral imperative to maintain a business relationship beyond what was explicitly and honestly agreed to in assuming the relationship. The company has no paternalistic responsibility to its employees.