Blog purpose

This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA. The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore, The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them. THIS BLOG WILL NOT POST ANY MAGA PROPAGANDA OR ANY MISINFORMATION REGARDLESS OF SOURCE. Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted. Blog author serves as a moderator. For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com

Blog rules

  • Stay on topic.
  • No profanity, threatening language, pornography.
  • NO NAME CALLING.
  • No political debate.
  • Posts and comments are posted several times a day.

Wednesday, November 14, 2012

Employment Conditions are a "right of property in CA"

Employment Conditions are a "right of property in CA"
When an employee is hired into a class of employees, and is in that class of employees for over a year, he inherits the conditions of employment as a "right of property." If the employer decides to unilaterally change the conditions surrounding this employement, such a remove seniority as a critera for employment priority during times of layoff, or unilaterally makes an employee at-will after a year or more of not being at-will, this is a breach of the "right of property." This has been argued quite successfully several times against the U of CA, and can and will be done against LLNS should it attempt to do this. Your thoughts?
November 13, 2012 4:00 PM
Delete
 
Note from scooby: the following is a comment made while the post was still in the suggestions section:

How does an employer change wages and working conditions, such as in a downturn or loss of funding? Is termination the only tool? What about reduction of work hours? What is the source of this "right"? It seems that an employer can change the work contract of future wages and working conditions at a future date and the employee has the choice of accepting contract or terminating. It seems that making a one-year work contract a permanent right infringes the property rights of the employer. Who would employ under these unfavorable conditions?

More info appreciated. Not my field.
By at

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Regarding "how does an employer change wages and working conditions?"

Certainly it can, but once it creates a class of workers and conditions for their employment including policies for reduction scenarios, it cannot simply change the rules retroactive to the original employment contract without due processes. So suggesting that seniority no longer plays a role, is a significant change, and also bespeaks potential age discrimination. CA law is more restrictive in this regard than Federal or other states.

11/14/2012 4:52 PM
Anonymous said...

What is an employment if none is sighed? If it the policies and procedures at the time of hire, can they be amended? If they can be amended or updated, don't they become effective at some later point in time? Can't this happen without employee input? (not suggesting good practice, just trying to understand current law).

If the above line of reasoning is correct in CA, for those not bound by collective bargaining agreements or written employment contracts, is it not true that an employer can unilaterally change wages and working conditions to what is allowable under law, and the choice the employee has is to accept the updates or leave?

Again. Not advocating. Just trying to understand.

11/15/2012 9:58 AM
Anonymous said...

Or to stay on and to adapt his/her performance.

11/15/2012 10:01 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days