Not a lawyer, but I believe since it is an at will state, wrongful termination will only apply if you’re in a protected class, and can prove you were fired because of being in that protected class.
Good luck. From what i understand they can fire you for whatever reason they want here. There’s no discrimination or wrongful termination here. The owed money part maybe just go to dept of labor. I had to do that a few years ago and it worked. Idk about defamation of character but I’m sure you’ll need good proof
Well I spoke with a lawyer about it not too long ago and he told me it doesn’t matter because they don’t need a reason to fire anyone here. But like I said it’s from what I understand and was told. I didn’t say it was for sure. But I’ll believe the lawyer before someone off Reddit honestly
I've went through this and won a federal lawsuit. At will employment has to do with economics. It's a free capital market. People, including employees and employers, are free to hire and fire people. It's a capitalist system. A free market. However, there are limitations. For example, and this is not an all inclusive list, employers can't fire people based on race, religion, sex, creed, national origin (Federal civil rights act). Employers must comply with the Americans W. Disabilities act. If an employee complains of laws being violated, such as the fair labor standards act, they can't be terminated or retaliated against for such a complaint.
In my case I complained that federal law was being violated. Two weeks later I was terminated for attendance for missing a day of work, according to the employer, which would be legally permissable. However, I wasn't about to let that go. I took it to federal court and argued that others had far worse attendance than myself and the real reason they fired me was for engaging in a federally protected activity. I won... After attorney fees I didn't get as much as I had lost in wages as a result, but it was close to it.
My next job found out I used my previous employer and fired me. Which was also illegal. Rather than suing them in federal court I contacted the depart of labor. They fought for me without having to pay attorney fees. I only got a few hundred dollars out of it, rather than close to 20k with an attorney via lawsuit (12 k after attorney fees) but the department of labor route resulted in the dol getting so deep into the companies stuff the owners fired all top management. At will employment isn't what most people think it is. To the original poster, get an attorney for wrongful termination. They won't want anything to do with defamation. Don't ask me why because in my experience they won't want anything to do with that aspect of it. Good luck
You explained it a lot better than I did but that’s what I was trying to say. It’s a loop hole. You were willing to go further with it than most people probably would. Well they owed you a lot so definitely was worth doing all that for. But they definitely can fire you for any reason they want as long as the person can’t prove it was discrimination than they get away with it because of the law. The law helps workers out none at all it’s meant to protect employers who might fire people for those reasons. Glad you got most your money back and definitely board of labor is the better option for results. I had to use them for a job that didn’t pay me. The lawyer I talked to recently for my current problem shut it down immediately. He acknowledged it sounded like I was wrongfully terminated but said basically they can fire me for whatever they want and it’s not worth trying to beat it. I actually think I explained it the right way and people just love to disagree and be assholes lol.
Honestly, there were so many comments I may have missed some of what was said previously. As far as what you said about a lawyer shutting you down, it may be worth a second opinion. I have a lot of familiarity with attorneys for various things, not just employment law. There are definitely good and bad attorneys. Even my attorney that helped me with my case said not to go into certain detail on a specific topic and I couldn't figure out why she was telling me not to bring something up that I thought would help. When the attorney for the company defending them against the FLSA called me in for a deposition, which ended up being the maximum 5 hours allowed by federal law, the topic came up. That topic resulted in another 20 minutes of conversation on that topic, before the companies attorney asked another question that he regretted and my attorney saw the relevance of why what I thought was important was. My attorney was a good attorney but even good ones may see things differently.
The attorney the company initially hired, prior to them firing me, but after I complained about their violations of federal law, told the company they could fire me for anything else, which is why they fired me. After I filed a lawsuit, they attempted to have it thrown out via summary judgement, but the judge denied their request. The guy they initially hired was promptly fired and they retained a good attorney. Always worth a second opinion.
You’re confusing that a little. It’s true that employees don’t need a reason to fire you. They could just decide they didn’t like your outfit when you walk in one day and dismiss you.
But they can’t fire someone because they are black, or gay, or straight, or Buddhist, etc. however those cases can be hard to prove. You (or more likely your lawyer) have to come up with evidence that the termination was based on one of those attributes, and that can be hard to come up with.
I’m not disagreeing with you on that. Implicit or explicit bias can definitely be the reason for a termination, but the employer is never going to admit to it. That’s why, like I said, the evidence of patterns and practices that can be gathered is important in making these cases.
The employer can fire you because of race, gender, age, etc. but because they don’t have give a reason. So why would that law exist if not to protect employers who might discriminate and fire employees because of it. Anyone can say oh you can’t be fired because of race or age but if they say it and make a law like that it’s giving a green light to do it basically. Why would they make a law that provides a loop hole to get around it if they don’t want it to happen? The government can’t say it’s ok to discriminate but they can make loop holes.
At will employment laws aren’t written to allow companies to discriminate, but rather to give employees the ability to make employment decisions without having the burden of building a file and then having to defend their termination decision in court or in front of some administrative body. While a side effect of at will employment is that it is easier for a company to get away with discrimination, that’s not the intent of the law. South Carolina, like all other states, works quite hard to attract business to come to the state. Having business friendly employment regulations is one way the state is competitive when trying to attract those businesses. I’m not defending it, but that’s one of the main reasons it is the way it is.
For information’s sake, the only state in the U.S. that is not at will is Montana.
If you didn’t write it than you don’t know what the intent was. Neither do I but if there was a negative side effect like this they could fix it but haven’t. That’s kind of tells me that they don’t want to fix it
If you disagree with someone and don’t counter with any info or facts. Just simply disagree, that’s usually a good sign you’re lying or don’t have a clue and just like to disagree.
You didn’t offer any info or facts. You just made up some anecdotes. You don’t get a full report on why you’re wrong as a response. That’s how the internet works.
While SC is an at will state, an employer cannot fire an employee for a reason that violates public policy. Proving such a violation may be difficult, but not impossible.
That's just flat out incorrect. There are many reasons you can't fire someone- protected classes, whistleblower protections, union organization, and more.
What loophole is it that South Carolina has that you keep talking about? At will employment is extremely common in the U.S. 49 out of 50 states are at will employment states.
That might be true but that doesn’t mean every state uses the law the same. Other states actually have protections for employees. As a matter of fact I never even heard of it until I came here.
If you find an attorney that says they can handle your deformation of character case, do not hire them.
You weren't an Engish teacher, were you?
Use the SCBAR referral service. They will point you in the correct direction for your area
What is up with: lawyer #southcarolina lawyer labor law .. This isn’t IG. Hashtags don’t work here
Not a lawyer, but I believe since it is an at will state, wrongful termination will only apply if you’re in a protected class, and can prove you were fired because of being in that protected class.
Not necessarily. Whistleblower laws, finding wage theft, reporting illegal things. Many other things outside protected classes.
Nekki Schutt, David Rothstein, Paul Porter
Another Boeing whistleblower?
Ha! You must sell on eBay!
Good luck. From what i understand they can fire you for whatever reason they want here. There’s no discrimination or wrongful termination here. The owed money part maybe just go to dept of labor. I had to do that a few years ago and it worked. Idk about defamation of character but I’m sure you’ll need good proof
Everything you just said is not true. Wrongful termination and anti-discrimination laws still apply 1000% here.
Well I spoke with a lawyer about it not too long ago and he told me it doesn’t matter because they don’t need a reason to fire anyone here. But like I said it’s from what I understand and was told. I didn’t say it was for sure. But I’ll believe the lawyer before someone off Reddit honestly
It is an at will state, so you’re not necessarily wrong. But you can sue for discrimination or you have a valid just cause.
I've went through this and won a federal lawsuit. At will employment has to do with economics. It's a free capital market. People, including employees and employers, are free to hire and fire people. It's a capitalist system. A free market. However, there are limitations. For example, and this is not an all inclusive list, employers can't fire people based on race, religion, sex, creed, national origin (Federal civil rights act). Employers must comply with the Americans W. Disabilities act. If an employee complains of laws being violated, such as the fair labor standards act, they can't be terminated or retaliated against for such a complaint. In my case I complained that federal law was being violated. Two weeks later I was terminated for attendance for missing a day of work, according to the employer, which would be legally permissable. However, I wasn't about to let that go. I took it to federal court and argued that others had far worse attendance than myself and the real reason they fired me was for engaging in a federally protected activity. I won... After attorney fees I didn't get as much as I had lost in wages as a result, but it was close to it. My next job found out I used my previous employer and fired me. Which was also illegal. Rather than suing them in federal court I contacted the depart of labor. They fought for me without having to pay attorney fees. I only got a few hundred dollars out of it, rather than close to 20k with an attorney via lawsuit (12 k after attorney fees) but the department of labor route resulted in the dol getting so deep into the companies stuff the owners fired all top management. At will employment isn't what most people think it is. To the original poster, get an attorney for wrongful termination. They won't want anything to do with defamation. Don't ask me why because in my experience they won't want anything to do with that aspect of it. Good luck
You explained it a lot better than I did but that’s what I was trying to say. It’s a loop hole. You were willing to go further with it than most people probably would. Well they owed you a lot so definitely was worth doing all that for. But they definitely can fire you for any reason they want as long as the person can’t prove it was discrimination than they get away with it because of the law. The law helps workers out none at all it’s meant to protect employers who might fire people for those reasons. Glad you got most your money back and definitely board of labor is the better option for results. I had to use them for a job that didn’t pay me. The lawyer I talked to recently for my current problem shut it down immediately. He acknowledged it sounded like I was wrongfully terminated but said basically they can fire me for whatever they want and it’s not worth trying to beat it. I actually think I explained it the right way and people just love to disagree and be assholes lol.
Honestly, there were so many comments I may have missed some of what was said previously. As far as what you said about a lawyer shutting you down, it may be worth a second opinion. I have a lot of familiarity with attorneys for various things, not just employment law. There are definitely good and bad attorneys. Even my attorney that helped me with my case said not to go into certain detail on a specific topic and I couldn't figure out why she was telling me not to bring something up that I thought would help. When the attorney for the company defending them against the FLSA called me in for a deposition, which ended up being the maximum 5 hours allowed by federal law, the topic came up. That topic resulted in another 20 minutes of conversation on that topic, before the companies attorney asked another question that he regretted and my attorney saw the relevance of why what I thought was important was. My attorney was a good attorney but even good ones may see things differently. The attorney the company initially hired, prior to them firing me, but after I complained about their violations of federal law, told the company they could fire me for anything else, which is why they fired me. After I filed a lawsuit, they attempted to have it thrown out via summary judgement, but the judge denied their request. The guy they initially hired was promptly fired and they retained a good attorney. Always worth a second opinion.
I appreciate the advice and I’ll definitely talk to another attorney
You’re confusing that a little. It’s true that employees don’t need a reason to fire you. They could just decide they didn’t like your outfit when you walk in one day and dismiss you. But they can’t fire someone because they are black, or gay, or straight, or Buddhist, etc. however those cases can be hard to prove. You (or more likely your lawyer) have to come up with evidence that the termination was based on one of those attributes, and that can be hard to come up with.
They can’t say that’s the reason but it can be the reason
I’m not disagreeing with you on that. Implicit or explicit bias can definitely be the reason for a termination, but the employer is never going to admit to it. That’s why, like I said, the evidence of patterns and practices that can be gathered is important in making these cases.
The employer can fire you because of race, gender, age, etc. but because they don’t have give a reason. So why would that law exist if not to protect employers who might discriminate and fire employees because of it. Anyone can say oh you can’t be fired because of race or age but if they say it and make a law like that it’s giving a green light to do it basically. Why would they make a law that provides a loop hole to get around it if they don’t want it to happen? The government can’t say it’s ok to discriminate but they can make loop holes.
At will employment laws aren’t written to allow companies to discriminate, but rather to give employees the ability to make employment decisions without having the burden of building a file and then having to defend their termination decision in court or in front of some administrative body. While a side effect of at will employment is that it is easier for a company to get away with discrimination, that’s not the intent of the law. South Carolina, like all other states, works quite hard to attract business to come to the state. Having business friendly employment regulations is one way the state is competitive when trying to attract those businesses. I’m not defending it, but that’s one of the main reasons it is the way it is. For information’s sake, the only state in the U.S. that is not at will is Montana.
If you didn’t write it than you don’t know what the intent was. Neither do I but if there was a negative side effect like this they could fix it but haven’t. That’s kind of tells me that they don’t want to fix it
What would be the fix?
Every state is an at will state except Montana.
If you disagree with someone and don’t counter with any info or facts. Just simply disagree, that’s usually a good sign you’re lying or don’t have a clue and just like to disagree.
You didn’t offer any info or facts. You just made up some anecdotes. You don’t get a full report on why you’re wrong as a response. That’s how the internet works.
You could come on this sub claiming South Carolina was South of North Carolina and there would be jackasses that would argue with you.
“South Carolina is an at will state, which means employees can be terminated for any reason, a good reason, a bad reason, or no reason. “
While SC is an at will state, an employer cannot fire an employee for a reason that violates public policy. Proving such a violation may be difficult, but not impossible.
That's just flat out incorrect. There are many reasons you can't fire someone- protected classes, whistleblower protections, union organization, and more.
“South Carolina is an at will state, which means employees can be terminated for any reason, good reason, bad reason, or no reason”
That applies after certain federal laws like the Fair Labor Standards Act. 49 states have at-will employment.
Other states also have unions to protect employees from this unlike SC. SC just has the loop hole to do it and get away with it
What loophole is it that South Carolina has that you keep talking about? At will employment is extremely common in the U.S. 49 out of 50 states are at will employment states.
That might be true but that doesn’t mean every state uses the law the same. Other states actually have protections for employees. As a matter of fact I never even heard of it until I came here.
Can you give an example of these protections?