<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments for We Have Moved!</title>
	<link>http://texaswrongfultermination.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:11:19 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why At-Will Employment is Bad for Employers by Employer Ripped Me Off</title>
		<link>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2007/09/12/why-at-will-employment-is-bad-for-employers/#comment-283</link>
		<author>Employer Ripped Me Off</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2008 15:13:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2007/09/12/why-at-will-employment-is-bad-for-employers/#comment-283</guid>
		<description>@ Michael Fox -

Burden of proof argument is not that persuasive.  The burden of proof is carried past dismissal into discovery.  

Thus, the employer still absorbs a considerable cost in terminations under employment at will.  The complaint is taken as true on its face.  Naturally, many employment at wills are oral in nature, thus, an employee may make good faith claims.  At a very late stage in the litigation process, a jury may decide otherwise.

Even in the complaint-answer stage, the employer can only rebut with documentary proof.  Even that may not be sufficient given the low level of proof required to move a complaint into discovery.

Given that the hodge podge of laws provide causes of actions for about 80 percent of the population (e.g., women, over 50, minorities, disabled, etc.) a very large section of population is considered in the 'protected class.'  Thus, the legal framework for colorable claims are easily obtained for a very large percentage of the population.

Thus, given the above, it would seem that uniformity, predictability, and the ability to avoid protracted litigation would be less burdensome on the economy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ Michael Fox -</p>
<p>Burden of proof argument is not that persuasive.  The burden of proof is carried past dismissal into discovery.  </p>
<p>Thus, the employer still absorbs a considerable cost in terminations under employment at will.  The complaint is taken as true on its face.  Naturally, many employment at wills are oral in nature, thus, an employee may make good faith claims.  At a very late stage in the litigation process, a jury may decide otherwise.</p>
<p>Even in the complaint-answer stage, the employer can only rebut with documentary proof.  Even that may not be sufficient given the low level of proof required to move a complaint into discovery.</p>
<p>Given that the hodge podge of laws provide causes of actions for about 80 percent of the population (e.g., women, over 50, minorities, disabled, etc.) a very large section of population is considered in the &#8216;protected class.&#8217;  Thus, the legal framework for colorable claims are easily obtained for a very large percentage of the population.</p>
<p>Thus, given the above, it would seem that uniformity, predictability, and the ability to avoid protracted litigation would be less burdensome on the economy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Scotus Issues Opinion in IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez by Tyson Wants High Court to Redefine &#8220;Work&#8221; &#124; San Antonio &#38; Austin Employment Lawyer • Age Discrimination • Sexual Harassment • Unpaid Overtime • Wrongful Termination Attorneys</title>
		<link>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2005/11/10/scotus-issues-opinion-in-ibp-inc-v-alvarez/#comment-268</link>
		<author>Tyson Wants High Court to Redefine &#8220;Work&#8221; &#124; San Antonio &#38; Austin Employment Lawyer • Age Discrimination • Sexual Harassment • Unpaid Overtime • Wrongful Termination Attorneys</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2008 15:11:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2005/11/10/scotus-issues-opinion-in-ibp-inc-v-alvarez/#comment-268</guid>
		<description>[...] work under the FLSA in 2005 opinion - IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez. We posted about that decision here. The language of the unanimous decision in the Alvarez case would lead me to believe that the Court [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] work under the FLSA in 2005 opinion - IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez. We posted about that decision here. The language of the unanimous decision in the Alvarez case would lead me to believe that the Court [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Humans (except for lawyers) Are Predisposed Towards Optimism by Rockland County Lawyer</title>
		<link>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2007/11/27/humans-except-for-lawyers-are-predisposed-towards-optimism/#comment-245</link>
		<author>Rockland County Lawyer</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2007 22:17:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2007/11/27/humans-except-for-lawyers-are-predisposed-towards-optimism/#comment-245</guid>
		<description>I am not really so sure about that study.  I have found that many of the lawyers that I work with have an over optimistic  outlook on their cases, or they just hide it very well.

I did find the article interesting, however I was curious if I was the only one that did not take this article for fact.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am not really so sure about that study.  I have found that many of the lawyers that I work with have an over optimistic  outlook on their cases, or they just hide it very well.</p>
<p>I did find the article interesting, however I was curious if I was the only one that did not take this article for fact.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why At-Will Employment is Bad for Employers by Michael Fox</title>
		<link>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2007/09/12/why-at-will-employment-is-bad-for-employers/#comment-226</link>
		<author>Michael Fox</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 03:15:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2007/09/12/why-at-will-employment-is-bad-for-employers/#comment-226</guid>
		<description>The main reason for maintaing employment at will is the burden of proof. True there are many exceptions to employment at will, but the employee bears the burden of proof in establishing them. If employments could only be terminated for cause, the employer would have the burden. You can debate just how important burden of proof is, but it's always better for it to be on the other side.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The main reason for maintaing employment at will is the burden of proof. True there are many exceptions to employment at will, but the employee bears the burden of proof in establishing them. If employments could only be terminated for cause, the employer would have the burden. You can debate just how important burden of proof is, but it&#8217;s always better for it to be on the other side.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Limits of Free Speech in the Workplace by Ask a Manager</title>
		<link>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2007/10/02/limits-of-free-speech-in-the-workplace/#comment-189</link>
		<author>Ask a Manager</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Oct 2007 20:25:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2007/10/02/limits-of-free-speech-in-the-workplace/#comment-189</guid>
		<description>I always find it fascinating that people mistakenly think that free speech applies to private companies. It only prohibits the government from restricting people's speech -- it has nothing to do with restrictions on speech created by private individuals or entities. It's a weirdly common misunderstanding.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I always find it fascinating that people mistakenly think that free speech applies to private companies. It only prohibits the government from restricting people&#8217;s speech &#8212; it has nothing to do with restrictions on speech created by private individuals or entities. It&#8217;s a weirdly common misunderstanding.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Spurs Roll Past Jazz, Into NBA Finals! by Tyson</title>
		<link>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2007/05/30/spurs-roll-past-jazz-into-nba-finals/#comment-21</link>
		<author>Tyson</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2007 16:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2007/05/30/spurs-roll-past-jazz-into-nba-finals/#comment-21</guid>
		<description>I appreciate you sharing this sad and unfortunate news with all of us employmnet attorneys.  May we all collectively mourn the Jazz premature departure from the playoffs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I appreciate you sharing this sad and unfortunate news with all of us employmnet attorneys.  May we all collectively mourn the Jazz premature departure from the playoffs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Texas Supreme Court Changes Non-Compete Landscape by mobile notary</title>
		<link>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2006/10/25/texas-supreme-court-changes-non-compete-landscape/#comment-20</link>
		<author>mobile notary</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Oct 2006 19:42:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2006/10/25/texas-supreme-court-changes-non-compete-landscape/#comment-20</guid>
		<description>We have issues with non-competes at my business. We train our employees for job that is typically a contractor position, so our non-compete agreement is very important as it would be easy for them to start freelancing after we train them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We have issues with non-competes at my business. We train our employees for job that is typically a contractor position, so our non-compete agreement is very important as it would be easy for them to start freelancing after we train them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Blogosphere Response to Murphy Tax Decision by Todd Kraft</title>
		<link>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2006/08/24/blogosphere-response-to-murphy-tax-decision/#comment-16</link>
		<author>Todd Kraft</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Sep 2006 01:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2006/08/24/blogosphere-response-to-murphy-tax-decision/#comment-16</guid>
		<description>The Roth CPA blog noted misses an important point.  The estate and gift taxes are constitutional because they are excise taxes, not because Congress has unfettered taxation powers.  Otherwise, the estate and gift taxes would be unconstitutional.  This has been tested in the Supreme Court under the apportionment clause.  An income tax on emotional damage is not an excise tax.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Todd Kraft, Tax Attorney -- Dallas Texas</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Roth CPA blog noted misses an important point.  The estate and gift taxes are constitutional because they are excise taxes, not because Congress has unfettered taxation powers.  Otherwise, the estate and gift taxes would be unconstitutional.  This has been tested in the Supreme Court under the apportionment clause.  An income tax on emotional damage is not an excise tax.</p>
<p>Todd Kraft, Tax Attorney &#8212; Dallas Texas</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Update: The $1.7 Million Dollar Spanking by chris</title>
		<link>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2006/05/16/update-the-17-million-dollar-spanking/#comment-11</link>
		<author>chris</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jun 2006 22:35:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2006/05/16/update-the-17-million-dollar-spanking/#comment-11</guid>
		<description>test 5</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>test 5</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Walmart CEO discusses issues with managers in &#34;Lee&#8217;s Garage&#34; by Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2006/02/17/walmart-ceo-discusses-issues-with-managers-in-lees-garage/#comment-10</link>
		<author>Anonymous</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2006 22:29:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://texaswrongfultermination.com/2006/02/17/walmart-ceo-discusses-issues-with-managers-in-lees-garage/#comment-10</guid>
		<description>Nice to see the real Walmart.&lt;br/&gt;Intimidation, fear, and control to the store manager who wants his concerns addressed, just as the Quebec store workers wanted before they were forced to look for other work.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Shame Walmart. Shame</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice to see the real Walmart.<br />Intimidation, fear, and control to the store manager who wants his concerns addressed, just as the Quebec store workers wanted before they were forced to look for other work.</p>
<p>Shame Walmart. Shame</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
