🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 12:18:21 -0500, "Grackle" <nos...@lalaland.com>
wrote:

>"Bill" <mrspamnobillo@nospam.bom> wrote in message 
>news:vE1od.297559$%k.36542@pd7tw2no...
>> Just more reasons not to by Anything from EA
>>
>> http://www.livejournal.com/users/ea_spouse/
>>
>> http://www.igda.org/qol/open_letter.php
>
>I've seen employers screw many people over countless times where I work, 
>with little recourse.  The law is a joke except in extreme circumstances, 
>usually regarding some form of discrimination.  Other than that, it's full 
>of loopholes, and employers can do whatever they want, regardless of the 
>impact it has on its employees.  At least that's the case in white collar 
>world.  As an example, you can fire someone who's perfectly competant (but 
>you don't like him/her for whatever reason), claim the position has been 
>abolished, hire someone new for the old position, but give the old position 
>a new name.  Sure that's 'illegal', but you have to prove it actually 
>occured, and there's the rub -- you can't. 
>


I always thought US labour law to be quite robust and equitable.
Referring to my other post demonstrates this belief.  Down here, South
Africa, our labour law is very much centered around worker rights and
many beleive too much so.

Lynley