Why don't we not pay people to stay out of the labor market, and let market forces dictate wages? That is, do you believe in market forces (in which case your idea is inconsistent with your beliefs) or not (in which case your idea is silly).
Why do you think market forces would cease to exist, if the public sector competes with the private sector for labor market participants?
Do you think non sequiturs somehow help your arguments seem more coherent?
Full compliance with at-will employment doctrine, in my opinion, should allow an individual to quit before being fired for cause, and still be eligible for unemployment benefits.
It is my further opinion, that full compliance with at-will employment doctrine would provide a safety net for individuals who are not motivated in just any job, or their full time profession (vocation); regardless of circumstances. And, also provide for an employers 9A right to at-will employment, without the additional cost of potential litigation.
Well, Daniel, your opinion does nothing to answer the poster's question, so it has no relevance here.
ZP, that's too situation specific to call. I wouldn't count on it, but stranger things have happened. It would be worth your while to apply; the worst that can happen is that you are denied, in which case you are no worse off than if you do not apply at all.
I meant it in the context of forms of administrative law and case law. If enough people start requesting full compliance with at-will doctrine, a measure of democracy can be said to exist; and, a form of democracy may become available for export.
Take it somewhere else, Daniel - we've heard it from you before, we are not impressed, and frankly we are bored silly with your attempts to work up a debate on the subject. Keep those attempts OUT of the forums where we are TRYING to answer legal questions.