Employment at will is a doctrine that seems to be fair to both theemployees and the employer. It is a doctrine that has been bothsupported and opposed in equal measure in the US judicial systems.This is a form of employment contract or a relationship between theemployer and the employee that gives them equal rights (Cross et al.,2014). In other words, the employer can terminate the services of theemployee without notice or without giving a reason for thetermination. Subsequently, the employee who has been terminated hasno right under the Nebraska state law to sue for losses that mighthave been incurred as a result of the loss or termination ofemployment. Equally, the employee has the right to end employment atany time without notice or reason. People who support this doctrineargue that both parties have benefits and the right to terminateemployment without cause or reason (Cross et al., 2014).

In Nebraska, this doctrine has an exception which states that anemployer and employee may enter into a contract when is an impliedcontract either through spoken or written words. The contract createdmay determine how employment may be terminated. The representationsmade during such utterances become binding and when difficultdecisions regarding employment are being made such representationsmust come to play (Ford et al., 2012). The employment at will is auseful doctrine when it has the exception as it is in Nebraska.However, when such a doctrine is left as it is, it is possible forthe employers or the employees to abuse. For instance, it is possiblefor an employer to terminate an employee/s on the basis of race,gender or pregnancy without giving the reason.

Whereas this exception may seem effective, it is clear that thedoctrine may be biased and used for personal gain. For instance, itis difficult for the courts to determine the words that were said bythe employer regarding the security of a job or the terms oftermination such as benefits (Ford et al., 2012). Employees can takeadvantage of this exception to demand various benefits such aspayment bonuses after they terminate their employment. Employment atwill should be enforced at Nebraska since it creates a balancebetween the employer and the employee. However, the exception onimplied contracts should be in written form to ensure that suchagreements are not violated.

Unionization of employees is aimed at creating a strong bargainingpower in the work place. In an employment at will and covenant ofgood faith and fair dealing, employees unions may not have a strongbargaining power towards the employer (Ford et al., 2012). However,when there is a binding agreement between the employer and theemployee, the union has a strong ground on which to stand and fightits battle. This is even strengthened when the contract is notverbal, but rather written.

Employment a will should be adopted in Nebraska but with theexception. Employees should be allowed to leave employment at will,but this should be guided by the various procedures laid down by thewritten contract. Unions should use the contracts to strengthen andenhance their fight for employee rights (Cross et al., 2014). Bydoing this, the unions would be demanding what is rightfully theirswithout oppressing the employer. The implied contracts arrived atshould focus on the procedure or the steps to be followed whenterminating employment or making decisions that related toemployment.


Cross, F. B., Miller, R. L. R., &amp Cross, F. B. (2014).&nbspThelegal environment of business: Text and cases :ethical, regulatory, global, and e-commerce issues. Mason, OH:South-Western Cengage Learning.

Ford, K. E., Notestine, K. E., Hill, R. N., &amp American BarAssociation. (2012). Fundamentals of employmentlaw. Chicago, Ill: Tort and Insurance Practice, American BarAssociation.