Contracts Commons^™

Mainstreaming Employment Contract Law: The Common Law Case For Reasonable Notice Of Termination, Rachel Arnow-Richman

Florida Law Review

This Article simultaneously exposes a fundamental error in employment termination doctrine and a paradox in contract law jurisprudence. Contemporary employment law has developed under the assumption that at-will parties may terminate their relationship both without reason and without notice. This Article argues that the second half of this formulation—the idea that parties reserve the procedural right to terminate without notice—is neither historically supported nor legally correct. Employment at will, as originally expressed, was a mere duration presumption reflecting America’s rejection of the predominant British rule favoring one-year employment terms. While subsequent case law expanded the presumption in various ways, a …

Justice, Employment, And The Psychological Contract, Larry A. Dimatteo, Robert C. Bird, Jason A. Colquitt

UF Law Faculty Publications

The paper is a multidisciplinary collaboration between contract law, employment law and management scholars and draws from the fields of law, management, and psychology. After reviewing and noting the gaps in the employment and justice literatures, this paper presents the findings of a survey of 763 participants to measure whether certain variables—procedural and substantive fairness, as well as educating employees on the principle of employment at will—impact the propensities of employees to retaliate and litigate at the time of discharge.

The survey results are significant and striking. We find statistically significant reductions in retaliation and litigation rates when survey respondents …

When Trade Secrets Become Shackles: Fairness And The Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine, Elizabeth A. Rowe

UF Law Faculty Publications

Critics of the inevitable disclosure doctrine decry the inconsistency with which courts rule on these cases, and the difficulty in predicting case outcomes. They contend that courts are left to "grapple with a decidedly ... nebulous standard of 'inevitability."' Further, they claim the doctrine undermines the employee's fundamental right to move freely and pursue his or her livelihood.

Ultimately, both the problem and solution here are about fairness: fairness in the employer-employee relationship, fairness in the application of the law, and fairness in providing protection from unfair competition between competing employers. The crux of the opposition to the doctrine, in …