[rmahan]

That would essentially be at will employment, our current system. “Stopping” at two years is an improvement from our current system because employment (or rather, a salary) would be a guaranteed via a contract. People wouldn’t sign a weekly contract like that if a 2yr contract existed elsewhere

[dehrmann]

People like to think that evil bosses will fire people for shits and giggles a la "Black Fridays" in Arrested Development, but finding and training people is such a hassle, the theoretical "you can be fired whenever for no reason" is rarely abused to that extent.

[thr0wawayf00]

> the theoretical "you can be fired whenever for no reason" is rarely abused to that extent.

I used to think this way until it happened to me. The CEO didn't care that she was losing a senior technical resource because it wasn't going to be her job to replace me. She found out I was interviewing and fired me because she hated it when people resigned. It was so bizarre, but those people do exist.

[neon_electro]

I think in organizations where the loss of an individual with years of institutional knowledge is felt, this applies more.

Startup just acquired a competitor and doubled its headcount overnight? Who cares about retraining folks you want to fire after that? You have to reorganize the new merged organization anyways, what better than to realign salaries with existing budgets?

[chartpath]

At will employment is not legal in Canada.