• Casey General Store Pizza Coupons
• Casey's Employee Website

Employee Benefits FAQ (Effective January 2016). Casey’s Welcome Brochure provided to new employees at store level, and in the Employee Handbook. Online Videos: A benefits video library is available at. This coverage is paid for entirely by Casey’s General Stores. Casey's General Store / employee. A description of the car and the employee.again read the handbook.Casey's allows breaks as long as all your. What are some tips on making it through the job interview process at Caseys General Stores? Update Cancel. Casey's isn't your normal corner mart, they are pretty enforcing of the rules, but the handbook rules are all pretty fair. My manager however, was DEVOUT Catholic, and in a permanent grump. Do employees at Casey’s General Stores.

A. Factual and Procedural Background

Tina Sherer worked for Casey's Retail Company ('Casey's') from December 30, 2008 to mid-May 2010. Hired as a cashier, Sherer was later promoted to assistant manager of the Casey's store in Wood River, Illinois. While she was working a busy shift in that capacity on May 11, 2010, a shipment of inventory arrived at the store. Sherer completed her routine job duties but did not unload the shipment that had been delivered. Six days later, Casey's fired Sherer.

On December 29, 2010, Sherer filed suit in the Circuit Court of Madison County, Illinois against Casey's (whom she named as 'Casey's General Stores, Inc.'). Her complaint contains two counts. Count 1 alleges 'wrongful discharge,' and Count 2 alleges intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Defense counsel clarifies (Doc. 7, n. 1) that Sherer's employer actually was Casey's Retail Company, a subsidiary of Casey's General Stores, Inc. In other words, Casey's General Stores, Inc. is incorrectly named as the Defendant herein. Plaintiff Sherer can correct this in her First Amended Complaint, the filing of which is described further below.

Served with the state court complaint on January 10, 2011, Casey's timely removed the action to this United States District Court. Subject matter jurisdiction rests on the federal diversity statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The parties are completely diverse. Sherer is an Illinois citizen, and both Casey's — the named Defendant and the subsidiary/true employer — are Iowa citizens (incorporated in and maintaining principal places of business in that state). And the complaint indicates that the amount in controversy exceeds the $75,000 mark, exclusive of interest and costs.

On February 4, 2011, Casey's moved to dismiss plaintiff's complaint 'in its entirety with prejudice,' pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (Doc. 7). The motion is fully briefed with response and reply (Docs. 13 and 15). For the reasons described below, the Court partially grants the dismissal motion.

My idol download free. B. Applicable Legal Standards

A 12(b)(6) motion challenges the sufficiency of the complaint to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Hallinan v.Fraternal Order of Police Chicago Lodge 7, 570 F.3d 811, 820 (7^th Cir.), cert. denied,130 S. Ct. 749 (2009). The United States Supreme Court explained in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007), that Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal is warranted if the complaint fails to set forth 'enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'

In making this assessment, the District Court accepts as true all well-pled factual allegations and draws all reasonable inferences in the plaintiff's favor. See Rujawitz v. Martin, 561 F.3d 685, 688 (7^th Cir. 2009); St. John's United Church of Christv. City of Chicago, 502 F.3d 616, 625 (7^th Cir. 2007), cert.denied,128 S. Ct. 2431 (2008).

Even though Twombly (and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, ___ U.S. ___, 129 S. Ct. 1937 (2009)) retooled federal pleading standards, notice pleading remains all that is required in a complaint. 'A plaintiff still must provide only `enough detail to give the defendant fair notice of what the claim is and the grounds upon which it rests and, through his allegations, show that it is plausible, rather than merely speculative, that he is entitled to relief.' Tamayo v. Blagojevich, 526 F.3d 1074, 1083 (7^th Cir. 2008). The level of detail the complaint must furnish can differ depending on the type of case before the Court. So for instance, a complaint involving complex litigation (antitrust or RICO claims) may need a 'fuller set of factual allegations . . . to show that relief is plausible.' Tamayo, 526 F.3d at 1083, citingLimestone Dev. Corp. v. Village of Lemont, Illinois, 520 F.3d 797, 803-04 (7^th Cir. 2008).

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has offered further direction on what (post- Twombly Iqbal) a complaint must do to withstand dismissal for failure to state a claim. In Pugh v.Tribune Co., 521 F.3d 686, 699 (7^th Cir. 2008), the Court reiterated: 'surviving a Rule 12(b)(6) motion requires more than labels and conclusions;' the allegations must 'raise a right to relief above the speculative level.' Similarly, the Court remarked in Swanson v. Citibank, N.A., 614 F.3d 400, 403 (7^th Cir. 2010): 'It is by now well established that a plaintiff must do better than putting a few words on paper that, in the hands of an imaginative reader, might suggest that something has happened to her that might be redressed by the law.'

More recently, Judge Posner explained that Twombly and Iqbal:

require that a complaint be dismissed if the allegations do not state a plausible claim. The Court explained in Iqbal that 'the plausibility standard is not akin to a `probability requirement,' but it asks for more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully.' Id. at 1949. This is a little unclear because plausibility, probability, and possibility overlap. . . .

But one sees more or less what the Court was driving at: the fact that the allegations undergirding a plaintiff's claim could be true is no longer enough to save it. . . . . [T]he complaint taken as a whole must establish a nonnegligible probability that the claim is valid, though it need not be so great a probability as such terms as 'preponderance of the evidence' connote. . . . After Twombly and Iqbal a plaintiff to survive dismissal 'must plead some facts that suggest a right to relief that is beyond the `speculative level.' In re marchFIRST Inc., 589 F.3d 901, 905 (7th Cir. 2009).

C. Analysis

Count 1, captioned as 'Wrongful Discharge,' alleges that Defendant 'precipitously and unexpectedly discharged Plaintiff . . . without asking her explanation and or giving her an opportunity to explain herself' (Doc. 2-1, p. 2). Sherer maintains that her discharge constituted 'improper discipline' based on her failing to complete a job assignment — unloading the new shipment of inventory that arrived on May 11^th. The discipline/discharge was improper, alleges Sherer, because Casey's failed to follow its own system of progressive discipline and failed to provide adequate staffing to support her in her assistant manager position, rendering it impossible for her to fulfill her normal work duties and unload the shipment without working overtime (which was not allowed).

Casey's moves to dismiss Count 1 because (a) Illinois law does not recognize a general cause of action for wrongful discharge such as pled by Tina Sherer, and (b) Sherer's claim does not fall within the narrow exception to the general rule that, absent a contract, Illinois workers are 'at will' employees who may be discharged for any reason or no reason. The Court finds merit in Casey's argument.

Sitting in diversity, the undersigned Judge applies Illinois substantive law. See, e.g., Lewis v. CITGO Petroleum Corp., 561 F.3d 698, 702 (7^th Cir.), cert. denied,130 S. Ct. 1025 (Dec. 14, 2009), citing Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64, 78 (1938). Under Illinois law, the general rule is that 'an employee who does not have an employment contract can be fired at the will of the employer.' Robinson v. Alter Barge Line, Inc., 513 F.3d 668, 671 (7^th Cir. 2008). Stated another way: 'The general rule in Illinois is that an at-will employee may be discharged by the employer at any time and for any reason.' Grabs v. Safeway, Inc., 917 N.E.2d 122, 126 (Ill. App. 2009).

Illinois law carves out narrow exceptions to this rule if the employee was fired for reporting dangerous or illegal activities at work, Robinson, 513 F.3d at 671, citing Metzger v. DaRosa, 805 N.E.2d 1165 (Ill. 2004), or the employee was terminated for exercising a right granted under the Illinois Workers' Compensation Act, 820 ILCS305/1, et seq. (West. 2006), such as pursuing workers' compensation benefits. Grabs, 917 N.E.2d at 126, citing Kelsay v.Motorola, 384 N.E.2d 353 (Ill. 1978).

The Illinois common-law tort of retaliatory discharge is available only in these two situations: (1) the discharge stems from exercise of rights under the Illinois Workers' Compensation Act, or (2) the discharge is for 'whistleblowing' activities — reporting illegal or improper conduct. Irizarry v. IllinoisCentral R. Co.,879 N.E.2d 1007, 1012 (Ill. App. 2007), citingSutherland v. Norfolk Southern Ry. Co., 826 N.E.2d 1021 (Ill. App. 2005). In both situations, the discharges are deemed retaliatory because 'they violate a clear mandate of public policy.' Grabs, 917 N.E.2d at 126.

The tort of retaliatory discharge 'has been narrowly construed in Illinois to include only discharges in retaliation for certain activities, such as reporting an employer's criminal violations, . . . or violations of health and safety standards,' and the Illinois Supreme Court 'has consistently sought to restrict the common law tort of retaliatory discharge.' Darchakv. City of Chicago Bd. of Educ., 580 F.3d 622, 628-29; citingFisher v. Lexington Health Care, Inc., 722 N.E.2d 1115, 1121 (Ill. 1999), and Buckner v. Atlantic Plant Maintenance, Inc., 694 N.E.2d 565, 569 (Ill. 1998).

The Illinois Court of Appeals firmly echoed this point in Irizarry,879 N.E.2d at 1012-13 (emphasis added):

'`Other than these two circumstances, . . . Illinois courts consistently have refused to expand the tort to encompass a private and individual grievance.'Sutherland, . . . 826 N.E.2d 1021, quoting Geary, . . . 793 N.E.2d 128; see also Buechele v. St. Mary's Hospital Decatur, . . . 509 N.E.2d 744 (1987) (refusing to extend tort of retaliatory discharge claim to employee allegedly fired for filing libel and slander suit against her employer, because the action involved only individual rights and not any clearly mandated public policy; Eisenbach v. Esformes, . . . 582 N.E.2d 196 (1991) (refusing to extend tort of retaliatory discharge to plaintiff, a limited partner, who alleged that he was terminated in retaliation for suing the general partner for breach of fiduciary duty because the action involved no clearly mandated public policy). . . .

Thus, to establish a retaliatory discharge, an Illinois plaintiff must demonstrate that she was discharged in retaliation for her protected activities and that the discharge violated a clear mandate of public policy. Darchak, 580 F.3d at 628-29, citing Blount v. Stroud, 904 N.E.2d 1, 9 (Ill. 2009).

We are at the pleading stage here (not the proof stage), but accepting as true the factual allegations and drawing in Sherer's favor all reasonable inferences therefrom, she has not stated a claim for retaliatory discharge. She does not allege that she exercised any right or remedy granted by the Illinois Workers' Compensation Act, and she has not identified any whistleblowing-type conduct on her part, such as reporting illegal activity by Casey's. Moreover, Sherer's discharge did not violate any clear mandate of public policy in Illinois.

Endeavoring to avoid dismissal of Count 1, Sherer tenders dual grounds for the Court to find that she was not an at-will employee. First, she contends that an employee handbook created a binding contractual relationship with her, obligating Casey's to provide progressive discipline rather than immediate discharge. Second, she contends that the discharge ran afoul of on-line job descriptions which limited the manager's discretion to discipline an assistant manager (like her) and set forth all tasks expected of her (a list that did not include unloading inventory). These arguments (and the attempt to recast Count 1 'Wrongful Discharge' as a contract claim) are unavailing.

An employee handbook or policy statement can create enforceable contractual rights. But for that to occur, the traditional requirements of contract formation must be satisfied. See Stollv. United Way of Champaign County, Illinois, Inc., 883 N.E.2d 575, 578-79 (Ill. App. 2008), citing Duldulao v. Saint Mary ofNazareth Hospital Center, 505 N.E.2d 314, 318 (Ill. 1987). Those requirements were not met here. Accepting as true the well-pled allegations of the complaint, the Court can discern no promise from Casey's to Sherer sufficiently definite that a reasonable employee would believe it constituted an 'offer.'

In her response to the dismissal motion, Sherer maintains that the employee handbook contained an 'offer of Progressive Discipline' which she 'expected . . . would be used' and was not (Doc. 13, p. 2). The employee handbook is not specifically quoted in or attached to Plaintiff's complaint. Count 1, however, does refer to Casey's mission statement and 'disciplinary policy' (parts of the handbook), and Casey's furnished excerpts of the handbook with its dismissal motion, asserting that the Court may consider the handbook provisions, because they were referred to in the complaint.

The law of this Circuit permits a district court, on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, to consider documents to which a complaint refers, if the documents are central to the plaintiff's claim and their authenticity is not contested. See Hecker v. Deere Co., 556 F.3d 575, 582 (7^th Cir. 2009) ('This court has been relatively liberal in its approach tothe rule articulated in Tierney [v. Vahle, 304 F.3d 734, 738 (7^th Cir. 2002)] and other cases.'). Both criteria are met here, allowing the undersigned to look 'outside the pleadings' on this 12(b)(6) motion, without violating Rule 12(d).

The employee handbook dooms Sherer's argument that her wrongful discharge claim rests on a binding promise made by Casey's to only use a certain system of progressive discipline. The handbook does not promise progressive discipline. The applicable provision (Section 34.300 'Corrective Action') plainly states that any of several 'methods' of corrective action — including discharge — 'may be imposed at any time at the discretion of the appropriate Supervisor,' and also that nothing in the section 'is intended to impact the Conditions of Employment which provide that the employment relationship is AT WILL and may be severed by either party at any time for any reason' (Doc. 15-1, p. 2).

Moreover, in Section 1, a prominent disclaimer in capital letters unambiguously exclaims: 'YOUR EMPLOYMENT WITH CASEY'S IS AT WILL AND MAY BE SEVERED BY EITHER PARTY AT ANY TIME WITH OR WITHOUT CAUSE. THIS EMPLOYEE HANDBOOK . . . IS NOT INTENDED TO CREATE A CONTRACT AND YOU SHOULD NOT EXPECT IT TO DO SO' (Doc. 15-1, p. 1). As the Seventh Circuit declared in 2007: 'A handbook that contains a clear promise of continued employment gives rise to legal entitlements. . . . At the same time, disclaiming language in a handbook may preclude the formation of an employment contract.' Moss v. Martin, 473 F.3d 694, 700 (7^th Cir. 2007), citing Davis v. Times Mirror Magazines, Inc., 697 N.E.2d 380, 388 (Ill. App. 1998).

Sherer's reliance on the job descriptions as a source of contractual rights supporting a wrongful discharge claim likewise fails. The job descriptions, found in the 'Career Opportunities' section of Casey's website, simply list the general duties and responsibilities for Store Managers and Assistant Managers. Sherer has cited (and the undersigned Judge is aware of) no Illinois precedent that such generic material on a website could give rise to legally binding contractual entitlements. This leaves the presumption under Illinois law (as buttressed by the Casey's employee handbook) that this employment was at will, terminable by either party. See Stoll, 883 N.E.2d at 578.

Accepting as true the allegations of the complaint and drawing in Sherer's favor the reasonable inferences from those allegations, the Court concludes that Count 1 does not state a plausible claim for retaliatory discharge. Count 1 fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, leading the Court to Count 2 of Sherer's complaint.

Count 2 alleges intentional infliction of emotional distress by Casey's. Sherer alleges that she 'dedicated herself to working for [Casey's] doing all of the job assignments in a timely and efficient manner,' that Casey's 'precipitously and unexpectedly discharged' her for failing to unload the new shipment of inventory, that Casey's did not let her 'explain herself,' that the discharge 'has been extremely upsetting to the Plaintiff who has less power in the relationship,' and that the firing has caused 'great financial stress and profound emotional stress to Plaintiff' (Complaint, Doc. 2-1, pp. 3-4).

Casey's launches two attacks on this claim. First, Casey's contends that the intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) claim is barred by statute (i.e., the exclusivity provisions of the Illinois Workers' Compensation Act barring an employee's intentional tort claims against a coworker). Second, Casey's argues that if the Act does not bar Sherer's IIED claim, Count 2 fails to state a claim for IIED under Illinois law.

Twenty years ago, the Illinois Supreme Court explained in Meerbrey v. Marshall Field Co., 564 N.E.2d 1222, 1225 (Ill. 1990):

The Workers' Compensation Act is designed to provide financial protection to workers for accidental injuries arising out of and in the course of employment. . . . Accordingly, the Act imposes liability without fault upon the employer and, in return, prohibits common law suits by employees against the employer. The exclusive remedy provision 'is part of the quid pro quo in which the sacrifices and gains of employees and employers are to some extent put in balance, for while the employer assumes a new liability without fault, he is relieved of the prospect of large damage verdicts.'

The exclusivity provision, 820 ILCS 305/5(a), states that other than compensation provided under the Act, no common-law or statutory right is available to recover damages from the employer for injury to an employee engaged in the duties of employment. So, it is well-settled in Illinois 'that an individual working within the scope of his employment may not sue a fellow employee for injuries allegedly sustained as a result of a tort. Rather, his sole remedy is a claim for benefits pursuant to the Act ( 820 ILCS 305/1, et seq.).' U.S. Bank v. Lindsey, 920 N.E.2d 515, 523 (Ill. App. 2009).

Furthermore, respondeat superior liability is not available to overcome the preemptive effect of the Act. McPherson v. City ofWaukegan, 379 F.3d 430, 442 (7^th Cir. 2004). An employer cannot be liable for a worker's tortious acts against a co-worker.

The preemptive effect of the Act can be avoided four ways — if the employee proves that the injury did not arise from her employment, that the injury was not received during the course of her employment, that the injury was non-compensable under the Act, or that the employer itself 'committed, commanded, or expressly authorized the torts against' the employee. McPherson, 379 F.3d at 443, citing Juarez v. Ameritech MobileCommunications, Inc., 957 F.2d 317, 323 n. 4 (7^th Cir. 1992). Sherer's complaint does not allege that Casey's expressly authorized its employee (her manager) to intentionally inflict emotional distress upon her. Nor does Count 2 contain any other allegations removing the IIED claim from the preemptive effect of the Act.

Assuming arguendo that the exclusivity provision presents no bar to Sherer's IIED claim, Count 2 fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The elements of an intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) claim in Illinois are threefold: (1) the defendant's conduct was extreme and outrageous, (2) the defendant intended to inflict severe emotional distress or knew there was a high probability that severe emotional distress would result from his conduct, and (3) the conduct in fact did inflict severe emotional distress on the plaintiff. See Lopez v. City of Chicago,464 F.3d 711, 720 (7^th Cir. 2006), citing McGrath v. Fahey,533 N.E.2d 806, 809 (Ill. 1988); Lifton v. Board of Educ., 416 F.3d 571, 579 (7^th Cir. 2005), citing Thomas v. Fuerst, 803 N.E.2d 619, 625 (Ill. App. 2004).

Count 2 falls short on the first two of these elements. Sherer does not allege that Casey's conduct was extreme and outrageous or that Casey's intended to inflict severe emotional distress (or knew there was a high probability it would result).

Furthermore, Illinois law is clear on what constitutes extreme and outrageous conduct. The defendant's conduct must be 'so extreme as to beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as intolerable in a civilized community.' Hukic v.Aurora Loan Services, 588 F.3d 420, 438 (7^th Cir. 2009), quotingKolegas v. Heftel Broad. Corp., 607 N.E.2d 201, 211 (Ill. 1992), and Lewis v. School Dist. #70, 523 F.3d 730, 747 (7^th Cir. 2008). Taking as true Sherer's allegations that the manager precipitously fired her without furnishing an opportunity to explain her failure to unload the shipment or giving her extra staff to assist in the task, this does not allege conduct contravening the bounds of decency in a civilized community.

Due to the shortcomings as to the first two elements of an IIED claim, the Court need not reach the third element of the claim and finds that Count 2 fails to state a claim on which relief can be granted. Bearing note, however, as to the third element, for the conduct to have actually caused 'severe emotional distress,' Illinois law requires that the distress inflicted be 'so severe that no reasonable person could be expected to endure it.' Lifton, 416 F.3d at 579. Count 2 alleges that Sherer's discharge resulted in 'great financial stress' and 'profound emotional distress,' but it is a stretch to reach that conclusion from the remainder of the allegations which attribute that stress to a seemingly routine, frequently-occurring event — a discharge following quickly on the heels of an employee's failure (or perceived failure) to complete a job assignment.

D. Conclusion

Accepting as true Plaintiff's factual allegations and drawing all reasonable inferences therefrom in her favor, the Court concludes that the complaint fails to state a claim for wrongful discharge or intentional infliction of emotional distress. The complaint provides fair notice of what Sherer is claiming, but the allegations do not show that 'it is plausible, rather than merely speculative' that Sherer is entitled to relief under either of these legal theories. Reger Development, LLC v.National City Bank, 592 F.3d 759, 763-64 (7^th Cir.), cert.denied,130 S. Ct. 3507 (2010), quoting Tamayo, 526 F.3d at 1083.

The Court GRANTS Casey's motion (Doc. 7) to dismiss the complaint, but (a) dismissal shall be without prejudice, (b) Sherer is GRANTED LEAVE to file a First Amended Complaint by April 21, 2011, and (c) the Court declines to award attorneys' fees and costs (fleetingly requested in one sentence of the motion at Doc. 7). Failure to timely file an amended complaint may result in dismissal of this action with prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

April 21, 2011

Employment is a relationship between two parties, usually based on a contract where work is paid for, where one party, which may be a corporation, for profit, not-for-profit organization, co-operative or other entity is the employer and the other is the employee.^[1] Employees work in return for payment, which may be in the form of an hourly wage, by piecework or an annual salary, depending on the type of work an employee does or which sector she or he is working in. Employees in some fields or sectors may receive gratuities, bonus payment or stock options. In some types of employment, employees may receive benefits in addition to payment. Benefits can include health insurance, housing, disability insurance or use of a gym. Employment is typically governed by employment laws, regulations or legal contracts.

• 2Employer–worker relationship
• 3Wage labor
• 4Employment contract
• 5Age-related issues
• 10Alternatives

Employees and employers[edit]

An employee contributes labor and expertise to an endeavor of an employer or of a person conducting a business or undertaking (PCB)^[2] and is usually hired to perform specific duties which are packaged into a job. In a corporate context, an employee is a person who is hired to provide services to a company on a regular basis in exchange for compensation and who does not provide these services as part of an independent business.^[3]

Employer–worker relationship[edit]

Employer and managerial control within an organization rests at many levels and has important implications for staff and productivity alike, with control forming the fundamental link between desired outcomes and actual processes. Employers must balance interests such as decreasing wage constraints with a maximization of labor productivity in order to achieve a profitable and productive employment relationship.

Labor acquisition / hiring[edit]

The main ways for employers to find workers and for people to find employers are via jobs listings in newspapers (via classified advertising) and online, also called job boards. Employers and job seekers also often find each other via professional recruitment consultants which receive a commission from the employer to find, screen and select suitable candidates. However, a study has shown that such consultants may not be reliable when they fail to use established principles in selecting employees.^[1] A more traditional approach is with a 'Help Wanted' sign in the establishment (usually hung on a window or door^[4] or placed on a store counter).^[3] Evaluating different employees can be quite laborious but setting up different techniques to analyze their skill to measure their talents within the field can be best through assessments.^[5] Employer and potential employee commonly take the additional step of getting to know each other through the process of job interview.

Training and development[edit]

Training and development refers to the employer's effort to equip a newly hired employee with necessary skills to perform at the job, and to help the employee grow within the organization. An appropriate level of training and development helps to improve employee's job satisfaction.^[6]

Remuneration[edit]

There are many ways that employees are paid, including by hourly wages, by piecework, by yearly salary, or by gratuities (with the latter often being combined with another form of payment). In sales jobs and real estate positions, the employee may be paid a commission, a percentage of the value of the goods or services that they have sold. In some fields and professions (e.g., executive jobs), employees may be eligible for a bonus if they meet certain targets. Some executives and employees may be paid in stocks or stock options, a compensation approach that has the added benefit, from the company's point of view, of helping to align the interests of the compensated individual with the performance of the company.

Employee benefits[edit]

Employee benefits are various non-wage compensation provided to employee in addition to their wages or salaries. The benefits can include: housing (employer-provided or employer-paid), group insurance (health, dental, life etc.), disability income protection, retirement benefits, daycare, tuition reimbursement, sick leave, vacation (paid and non-paid), social security, profit sharing, funding of education, and other specialized benefits. In some cases, such as with workers employed in remote or isolated regions, the benefits may include meals. Employee benefits can improve the relationship between employee and employer and lowers staff turnover.^[7]

Organizational justice[edit]

Organizational justice is an employee's perception and judgement of employer's treatment in the context of fairness or justice. The resulting actions to influence the employee-employer relationship is also a part of organizational justice.^[7]

Workforce organizing[edit]

Employees can organize into trade or labor unions, which represent the work force to collectively bargain with the management of organizations about working, and contractual conditions and services.^[8]

Ending employment[edit]

Usually, either an employee or employer may end the relationship at any time, often subject to a certain notice period. This is referred to as at-will employment. The contract between the two parties specifies the responsibilities of each when ending the relationship and may include requirements such as notice periods, severance pay, and security measures.^[8] In some professions, notably teaching, civil servants, university professors, and some orchestra jobs, some employees may have tenure, which means that they cannot be dismissed at will. Another type of termination is a layoff.

Wage labor[edit]

Wage labor is the socioeconomic relationship between a worker and an employer, where the worker sells their labor under a formal or informal employment contract. These transactions usually occur in a labor market where wages are market determined.^[6][7] In exchange for the wages paid, the work product generally becomes the undifferentiated property of the employer, except for special cases such as the vesting of intellectual property patents in the United States where patent rights are usually vested in the original personal inventor. A wage laborer is a person whose primary means of income is from the selling of his or her labor in this way.^[8]

In modern mixed economies such as that of the OECDcountries, it is currently the dominant form of work arrangement. Although most work occurs following this structure, the wage work arrangements of CEOs, professional employees, and professional contract workers are sometimes conflated with class assignments, so that 'wage labor' is considered to apply only to unskilled, semi-skilled or manual labor.^[9]

Wage slavery[edit]

Wage labor, as institutionalized under today's market economic systems, has been criticized,^[8] especially by both mainstream socialists and anarcho-syndicalists,^{[9][10][11][12]} using the pejorative term wage slavery.^[13][14] Socialists draw parallels between the trade of labor as a commodity and slavery. Cicero is also known to have suggested such parallels.^[15]

The American philosopher John Dewey posited that until 'industrial feudalism' is replaced by 'industrial democracy', politics will be 'the shadow cast on society by big business'.^[16]Thomas Ferguson has postulated in his investment theory of party competition that the undemocratic nature of economic institutions under capitalism causes elections to become occasions when blocs of investors coalesce and compete to control the state plus cities.^[17]

Employment contract[edit]

Australia[edit]

Casey General Store Pizza Coupons

Australian employment has been governed by the Fair Work Act since 2009.^[18]

Bangladesh[edit]

Bangladesh Association of International Recruiting Agencies (BAIRA) is an association of national level with its international reputation of co-operation and welfare of the migrant workforce as well as its approximately 1200 members agencies in collaboration with and support from the Government of Bangladesh.^[9]

Canada[edit]

In the Canadian province of Ontario, formal complaints can be brought to the Ministry of Labour. In the province of Quebec, grievances can be filed with the Commission des normes du travail.^[12]

Pakistan[edit]

Pakistan has no contract Labor, Minimum Wage and Provident Funds Acts. Contract labor in Pakistan must be paid minimum wage and certain facilities are to be provided to labor. However, the Acts are not yet fully implemented.^[9]

India[edit]

India has Contract Labor, Minimum Wage, Provident Funds Act and various other acts to comply with. Contract labor in India must be paid minimum wage and certain facilities are to be provided to labor. However, there is still a large amount of work that remains to be done to fully implement the Act.^[12]

Philippines[edit]

In the Philippines, employment is regulated by the Department of Labor and Employment.^[19]

United Kingdom[edit]

In the United Kingdom, employment contracts are categorised by the government into the following types:^[20]

• Fixed-term contract: last for a certain length of time, are set in advance, end when a specific task is completed, ends when a specific event takes place.
• Full-time or part-time contract: has no defined length of time, can be terminated by either party, is to accomplish a specific task, specified number of hours.^[19]
• Agency staff
• Freelancers, Consultants and Contractors

United States[edit]

For purposes of U.S. federal income tax withholding, 26 U.S.C. § 3401(c) provides a definition for the term 'employee' specific to chapter 24 of the Internal Revenue Code:

'For purposes of this chapter, the term “employee” includes an officer, employee, or elected official of the United States, a State, or any political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing. The term “employee” also includes an officer of a corporation.'^[21] This definition does not exclude all those who are commonly known as 'employees'. “Similarly, Latham’s instruction which indicated that under 26 U.S.C. § 3401(c) the category of ‘employee’ does not include privately employed wage earners is a preposterous reading of the statute. It is obvious that within the context of both statutes the word ‘includes’ is a term of enlargement not of limitation, and the reference to certain entities or categories is not intended to exclude all others.”^[22]

Employees are often contrasted with independent contractors, especially when there is dispute as to the worker's entitlement to have matching taxes paid, workers compensation, and unemployment insurance benefits. However, in September 2009, the court case of Brown v. J. Kaz, Inc. ruled that independent contractors are regarded as employees for the purpose of discrimination laws if they work for the employer on a regular basis, and said employer directs the time, place, and manner of employment.^[19]

In non-union work environments, in the United States, unjust termination complaints can be brought to the United States Department of Labor.^[23]

Labor unions are legally recognized as representatives of workers in many industries in the United States. Their activity today centers on collective bargaining over wages, benefits, and working conditions for their membership, and on representing their members in disputes with management over violations of contract provisions. Larger unions also typically engage in lobbying activities and electioneering at the state and federal level.^[19]

Most unions in America are aligned with one of two larger umbrella organizations: the AFL-CIO created in 1955, and the Change to Win Federation which split from the AFL-CIO in 2005. Both advocate policies and legislation on behalf of workers in the United States and Canada, and take an active role in politics. The AFL-CIO is especially concerned with global trade issues.^[17]

Sweden[edit]

According to Swedish law,^[24] there are three types of employment.

• Test employment (swe: Provanställning), where the employer hires a person for a test period of 6 months maximum. The employment can be ended at any time without giving any reason. This type of employment can be offered only once per employer and employee combination. Usually a time limited or normal employment is offered after a test employment.^[25]
• Time limited employment (swe: Tidsbegränsad anställning). The employer hires a person for a specified time. Usually they are extended for a new period. Total maximum two years per employer and employee combination, then it automatically counts as a normal employment.
• Normal employment (swe: Tillsvidareanställning / Fast anställning), which has no time limit (except for retirement etc.). It can still be ended for two reasons: personal reason, immediate end of employment only for strong reasons such as crime, or lack of work tasks (swe: Arbetsbrist), cancellation of employment, usually because of bad income for the company. There is a cancellation period of 1–6 months, and rules for how to select employees, basically those with shortest employment time shall be cancelled first.^[25]

There are no laws about minimum salary in Sweden. Instead there are agreements between employer organizations and trade unions about minimum salaries, and other employment conditions.

There is a type of employment contract which is common but not regulated in law, and that is Hour employment (swe: Timanställning), which can be Normal employment (unlimited), but the work time is unregulated and decided per immediate need basis. The employee is expected to be answering the phone and come to work when needed, e.g. when someone is ill and absent from work. They will receive salary only for actual work time and can in reality be fired for no reason by not being called anymore. This type of contract is common in the public sector.^[25]

Age-related issues[edit]

Younger age workers[edit]

Young workers are at higher risk for occupational injury and face certain occupational hazards at a higher rate; this is generally due to their employment in high-risk industries. For example, in the United States, young people are injured at work at twice the rate of their older counterparts.^[27] These workers are also at higher risk for motor vehicle accidents at work, due to less work experience, a lower use of seatbelts, and higher rates of distracted driving.^[28][29] To mitigate this risk, those under the age of 17 are restricted from certain types of driving, including transporting people and goods under certain circumstances.^[28]

High-risk industries for young workers include agriculture, restaurants, waste management, and mining.^[27][28] In the United States, those under the age of 18 are restricted from certain jobs that are deemed dangerous under the Fair Labor Standards Act.^[28]

Youth employment programs are most effective when they include both theoretical classroom training and hands-on training with work placements.^[30]

In the conversation of employment among younger aged workers, youth unemployment has also been monitored. Youth unemployment rates tend to be higher than the adult rates in every country in the world.^{[citation needed]}

Casey's Employee Website

Older age workers[edit]

Those older than the statutory defined retirement age may continue to work, either out of enjoyment or necessity. However, depending on the nature of the job, older workers may need to transition into less-physical forms of work to avoid injury. Working past retirement age also has positive effects, because it gives a sense of purpose and allows people to maintain social networks and activity levels.^[31] Older workers are often found to be discriminated against by employers.^[32]

Working poor[edit]

Employment is no guarantee of escaping poverty, the International Labour Organization (ILO) estimates that as many as 40% of workers are poor, not earning enough to keep their families above the $2 a day poverty line.^[25] For instance, in India most of the chronically poor are wage earners in formal employment, because their jobs are insecure and low paid and offer no chance to accumulate wealth to avoid risks.^[25] According to the UNRISD, increasing labor productivity appears to have a negative impact on job creation: in the 1960s, a 1% increase in output per worker was associated with a reduction in employment growth of 0.07%, by the first decade of this century the same productivity increase implies reduced employment growth by 0.54%.^[25] Both increased employment opportunities and increased labor productivity (as long as it also translates into higher wages) are needed to tackle poverty. Increases in employment without increases in productivity leads to a rise in the number of 'working poor', which is why some experts are now promoting the creation of 'quality' and not 'quantity' in labor market policies.^[25] This approach does highlight how higher productivity has helped reduce poverty in East Asia, but the negative impact is beginning to show.^[25] In Vietnam, for example, employment growth has slowed while productivity growth has continued.^[25] Furthermore, productivity increases do not always lead to increased wages, as can be seen in the United States, where the gap between productivity and wages has been rising since the 1980s.^[25]

Researchers at the Overseas Development Institute argue that there are differences across economic sectors in creating employment that reduces poverty.^[25] 24 instances of growth were examined, in which 18 reduced poverty. This study showed that other sectors were just as important in reducing unemployment, such as manufacturing.^[25] The services sector is most effective at translating productivity growth into employment growth. Agriculture provides a safety net for jobs and economic buffer when other sectors are struggling.^[25]

Models of the employment relationship[edit]

Scholars conceptualize the employment relationship in various ways.^[33] A key assumption is the extent to which the employment relationship necessarily includes conflicts of interests between employers and employees, and the form of such conflicts.^[34] In economic theorizing, the labor market mediates all such conflicts such that employers and employees who enter into an employment relationship are assumed to find this arrangement in their own self-interest. In human resource management theorizing, employers and employees are assumed to have shared interests (or a unity of interests, hence the label “unitarism”). Any conflicts that exist are seen as a manifestation of poor human resource management policies or interpersonal clashes such as personality conflicts, both of which can and should be managed away. From the perspective of pluralist industrial relations, the employment relationship is characterized by a plurality of stakeholders with legitimate interests (hence the label “pluralism), and some conflicts of interests are seen as inherent in the employment relationship (e.g., wages v. profits). Lastly, the critical paradigm emphasizes antagonistic conflicts of interests between various groups (e.g., the competing capitalist and working classes in a Marxist framework) that are part of a deeper social conflict of unequal power relations. As a result, there are four common models of employment:^[35]

1. Mainstream economics: employment is seen as a mutually advantageous transaction in a free market between self-interested legal and economic equals
2. Human resource management (unitarism): employment is a long-term partnership of employees and employers with common interests
3. Pluralist industrial relations: employment is a bargained exchange between stakeholders with some common and some competing economic interests and unequal bargaining power due to imperfect labor markets^[25]
4. Critical industrial relations: employment is an unequal power relation between competing groups that is embedded in and inseparable from systemic inequalities throughout the socio-politico-economic system.

These models are important because they help reveal why individuals hold differing perspectives on human resource management policies, labor unions, and employment regulation.^[36] For example, human resource management policies are seen as dictated by the market in the first view, as essential mechanisms for aligning the interests of employees and employers and thereby creating profitable companies in the second view, as insufficient for looking out for workers’ interests in the third view, and as manipulative managerial tools for shaping the ideology and structure of the workplace in the fourth view.^[37]

Academic literature[edit]

Literature on the employment impact of economic growth and on how growth is associated with employment at a macro, sector and industry level was aggregated in 2013.^[38]

Researchers found evidence to suggest growth in manufacturing and services have good impact on employment. They found GDP growth on employment in agriculture to be limited, but that value-added growth had a relatively larger impact.^[25] The impact on job creation by industries/economic activities as well as the extent of the body of evidence and the key studies. For extractives, they again found extensive evidence suggesting growth in the sector has limited impact on employment. In textiles however, although evidence was low, studies suggest growth there positively contributed to job creation. In agri-business and food processing, they found impact growth to be positive.^[38]

They found that most available literature focuses on OECD and middle-income countries somewhat, where economic growth impact has been shown to be positive on employment. The researchers didn't find sufficient evidence to conclude any impact of growth on employment in LDCs despite some pointing to the positive impact, others point to limitations. They recommended that complementary policies are necessary to ensure economic growth's positive impact on LDC employment. With trade, industry and investment, they only found limited evidence of positive impact on employment from industrial and investment policies and for others, while large bodies of evidence does exist, the exact impact remains contested.^[38]

Researchers have also explored the relationship between employment and illicit activities. Using evidence from Africa, a research team found that a program for Liberian ex-fighters reduced work hours on illicit activities. The employment program also reduced interest in mercenary work in nearby wars. The study concludes that while the use of capital inputs or cash payments for peaceful work created a reduction in illicit activities, the impact of training alone is rather low.^[39]

Globalization and employment relations[edit]

The balance of economic efficiency and social equity is the ultimate debate in the field of employment relations.^[40] By meeting the needs of the employer; generating profits to establish and maintain economic efficiency; whilst maintaining a balance with the employee and creating social equity that benefits the worker so that he/she can fund and enjoy healthy living; proves to be a continuous revolving issue in westernized societies.^[40]

Globalization has effected these issues by creating certain economic factors that disallow or allow various employment issues. Economist Edward Lee (1996) studies the effects of globalization and summarizes the four major points of concern that affect employment relations:

1. International competition, from the newly industrialized countries, will cause unemployment growth and increased wage disparity for unskilled workers in industrialized countries. Imports from low-wage countries exert pressure on the manufacturing sector in industrialized countries and foreign direct investment (FDI) is attracted away from the industrialized nations, towards low-waged countries.^[40]
2. Economic liberalization will result in unemployment and wage inequality in developing countries. This happens as job losses in uncompetitive industries outstrip job opportunities in new industries.
3. Workers will be forced to accept worsening wages and conditions, as a global labor market results in a “race to the bottom”. Increased international competition creates a pressure to reduce the wages and conditions of workers.^[40]
4. Globalization reduces the autonomy of the nation state. Capital is increasingly mobile and the ability of the state to regulate economic activity is reduced.

What also results from Lee’s (1996) findings is that in industrialized countries an average of almost 70 per cent of workers are employed in the service sector, most of which consists of non-tradable activities. As a result, workers are forced to become more skilled and develop sought after trades, or find other means of survival. Ultimately this is a result of changes and trends of employment, an evolving workforce, and globalization that is represented by a more skilled and increasing highly diverse labor force, that are growing in non standard forms of employment (Markey, R. et al. 2006).^[40]

Alternatives[edit]

Subcultures[edit]

Various youth subcultures have been associated with not working, such as the hippie subculture in the 1960s and 1970s (which endorsed the idea of 'dropping out' of society) and the punk subculture, in which some members live in anarchistsquats (illegal housing).

Postsecondary education[edit]

One of the alternatives to work is engaging in postsecondary education at a college, university or professional school. One of the major costs of obtaining a postsecondary education is the opportunity cost of forgone wages due to not working. At times when jobs are hard to find, such as during recessions, unemployed individuals may decide to get postsecondary education, because there is less of an opportunity cost.

Workplace democracy[edit]

Workplace democracy is the application of democracy in all its forms (including voting systems, debates, democratic structuring, due process, adversarial process, systems of appeal) to the workplace.^[41][42]

Self-employment[edit]

When an individual entirely owns the business for which they labor, this is known as self-employment. Self-employment often leads to incorporation. Incorporation offers certain protections of one's personal assets.^[40] Individuals who are self-employed may own a small business. They may also be considered to be an entrepreneur.

Social assistance[edit]

In some countries, individuals who are not working can receive social assistance support (e.g., welfare or food stamps) to enable them to rent housing, buy food, repair or replace household goods, maintenance of children and observe social customs that require financial expenditure.

Volunteerism[edit]

Workers who are not paid wages, such as volunteers who perform tasks for charities, hospitals or not-for-profit organizations, are generally not considered employed. One exception to this is an internship, an employment situation in which the worker receives training or experience (and possibly college credit) as the chief form of compensation.^[41]

Indentured servitude and slavery[edit]

Those who work under obligation for the purpose of fulfilling a debt, such as indentured servants, or as property of the person or entity they work for, such as slaves, do not receive pay for their services and are not considered employed. Some historians^[which?] suggest that slavery is older than employment, but both arrangements have existed for all recorded history.^{[citation needed]} Indentured servitude and slavery are not considered^{[by whom?]} compatible with human rights or with democracy.^[41]

See also[edit]

• Reserve army of labor (Marxism)

Notes and references[edit]

1. ^ ^abDakin, Stephen; Armstrong, J. Scott (1989). 'Predicting job performance: A comparison of expert opinion and research findings'(PDF). International Journal of Forecasting. 5 (2): 187–94. doi:10.1016/0169-2070(89)90086-1.
2. ^Archer, Richard; Borthwick, Kerry; Travers, Michelle; Ruschena, Leo (2017). WHS: A Management Guide (4 ed.). Cengage Learning Australia. pp. 30–31. ISBN978-0-17-027079-3. Retrieved 2016-03-30. The most significant definitions are 'person conducting a business or undertaking' (PCBU). 'worker' and 'workplace'. [..] 'PCBU' is a wider ranging term than 'employer', though this will be what most people understand by it.
3. ^ ^abRobert A. Ristau (2010). Intro to Business. Cengage Learning. p. 74. ISBN978-0-538-74066-1.
4. ^J. Mayhew Wainwright (1910). Report to the Legislature of the State of New York by the Commission appointed under Chapter 518 of the laws of 1909 to inquire into the question of employers' liability and other matters (Report). J. B. Lyon Company. pp. 11, 50, 144.
5. ^Industrial & Organizational Assessment
6. ^ ^abDeakin, Simon; Wilkinson, Frank (2005). The Law of the Labour Market(PDF). Oxford University Press.
7. ^ ^abcMarx 1847, Chapter 2.
8. ^ ^abcdEllerman 1992.
9. ^ ^abcdOstergaard 1997, p. 133.
10. ^Thompson 1966, p. 599.
11. ^Thompson 1966, p. 912.
12. ^ ^abcLazonick 1990, p. 37.
13. ^'wage slave'. merriam-webster.com. Retrieved 4 March 2013.
14. ^'wage slave'. dictionary.com. Retrieved 4 March 2013.
15. ^'..vulgar are the means of livelihood of all hired workmen whom we pay for mere manual labour, not for artistic skill; for in their case the very wage they receive is a pledge of their slavery.' – De Officiis[1]
16. ^'As long as politics is the shadow cast on society by big business, the attenuation of the shadow will not change the substance', in 'The Need for a New Party' (1931), Later Works 6, p163
17. ^ ^abFerguson 1995.
18. ^'House of Reps seals 'death' of WorkChoices'. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. 2008-03-19. Retrieved 2014-02-15.
19. ^ ^abcd'Brown v. J. Kaz, Inc., No. 08-2713 (3d Cir. Sept. 11, 2009)'. Retrieved 2010-01-23.
20. ^'Contract types and employer responsibilities'. gov.uk. Retrieved 21 May 2014.
21. ^26 U.S.C. § 3401(c)
22. ^United States v. Latham, 754 F.2d 747, 750 (7th Cir. 1985).
23. ^'Termination'. United States Department of Labor. Retrieved 27 September 2012.
24. ^Lag om anställningsskydd (1982:80)
25. ^ ^{abcdefghijklmnop}Claire Melamed, Renate Hartwig and Ursula Grant 2011. Jobs, growth and poverty: what do we know, what don't we know, what should we know?Archived May 20, 2011, at the Wayback Machine London: Overseas Development Institute
26. ^'Bluenomics'.
27. ^ ^ab'Young Worker Safety and Health'. www.cdc.gov. CDC NIOSH Workplace Safety and Health Topic. Retrieved 2015-06-15.
28. ^ ^abcd'Work-Related Motor Vehicle Crashes'(PDF). NIOSH Publication 2013-153. NIOSH. September 2013.
29. ^'Work-Related Motor Vehicle Crashes: Preventing Injury to Young Drivers'(PDF). NIOSH Publication 2013-152. NIOSH. September 2013.
30. ^Joseph Holden, Youth employment programmes – What can be learnt from international experience with youth employment programmes? Economic and private sector professional evidence and applied knowledge services https://partnerplatform.org/?fza26891
31. ^Chosewood, L. Casey (May 3, 2011). 'When It Comes to Work, How Old Is Too Old?'. NIOSH: Workplace Safety and Health. Medscape and NIOSH.
32. ^Baert, Stijn (February 20, 2016). 'Getting Grey Hairs in the Labour Market: An Alternative Experiment on Age Discrimination'. Journal of Economic Psychology. 57: 86–101. doi:10.1016/j.joep.2016.10.002. hdl:10419/114164.
33. ^Kaufman, Bruce E. (2004) Theoretical Perspectives on Work and the Employment Relationship, Industrial Relations Research Association.
34. ^Fox, Alan (1974) Beyond Contract: Work, Power and Trust Relations, Farber and Farber.
35. ^Budd, John W. and Bhave, Devasheesh (2008) 'Values, Ideologies, and Frames of Reference in Industrial Relations,' in Sage Handbook of Industrial Relations, Sage.
36. ^Befort, Stephen F. and Budd, John W. (2009) Invisible Hands, Invisible Objectives: Bringing Workplace Law and Public Policy Into Focus, Stanford University Press.
37. ^Budd, John W. and Bhave, Devasheesh (2010) 'The Employment Relationship,' in Sage Handbook of Handbook of Human Resource Management, Sage.
38. ^ ^abcYurendra Basnett and Ritwika Sen, What do empirical studies say about economic growth and job creation in developing countries? Economic and private sector professional evidence and applied knowledge services https://partnerplatform.org/?7ljwndv4
39. ^Blattman, Christopher; Annan, Jeannie (2016-02-01). 'Can Employment Reduce Lawlessness and Rebellion? A Field Experiment with High-Risk Men in a Fragile State'. American Political Science Review. 110 (1): 1–17. doi:10.1017/S0003055415000520. ISSN0003-0554.
40. ^ ^abcdefBudd, John W. (2004) Employment with a Human Face: Balancing Efficiency, Equity, and Voice, Cornell University Press.
41. ^ ^abcRayasam, Renuka (24 April 2008). 'Why Workplace Democracy Can Be Good Business'. U.S. News & World Report. Retrieved 16 August 2010.
42. ^Wolff, Richard D. (2012). Democracy at Work: A Cure for Capitalism. Haymarket Books. ISBN978-1-60846-247-6.

Bibliography[edit]

• Acocella, Nicola (2007). Social pacts, employment and growth: a reappraisal of Ezio Tarantelli's thought. Heidelberg: Springer Verlag. ISBN978-3-7908-1915-1.
• Anderson, Elizabeth (2017). Private Government: How Employers Rule Our Lives (and Why We Don't Talk about It). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. ISBN978-0-691-17651-2.
• Dubin, Robert (1958). The World of Work: Industrial Society and Human Relations. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall. p. 213. OCLC964691.
• Freeman, Richard B.; Goroff, Daniel L. (2009). Science and Engineering Careers in the United States: An Analysis of Markets and Employment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN978-0-226-26189-8.
• Lee, Eddy (January 1996). 'Globalization and Employment: Is Anxiety Justified?'. International Labour Review. 135 (5): 485–98. Archived from the original on 2013-05-16. Retrieved 2017-08-27 – via Questia.
• Markey, Raymond; Hodgkinson, Ann; Kowalczyk, Jo (2002). 'Gender, part-time employment and employee participation in Australian workplaces'. Employee Relations. 24 (2): 129–50. doi:10.1108/01425450210420884.
• Stone, Raymond J. (2005). Human Resource Management (5th ed.). Milton, Qld: John Wiley. pp. 412–14. ISBN978-0-470-80403-2.
• Wood, Jack M. (2004). Organisational Behaviour: A Global Perspective (3rd ed.). Milton, Qld: Wiley. pp. 355–57. ISBN978-0-470-80262-5.

External links[edit]

The dictionary definition of employment at Wiktionary Media related to Employment at Wikimedia Commons

• 'Business Link'. Businesslink.gov.uk. Archived from the original on 29 September 2012.
• 'Labor and Employment'. Government Information Library. University of Colorado at Boulder.
• 'Overview and topics of labour statistics'. Statistics and databases. International Labour Organization.