SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
workers
'Just Cause' Is a Worthy Cause
Activists in Ithaca, New York are mobilizing for the first city-wide ban on arbitrary firings in the US. Other cities should take note.
Nov 22, 2025
Activists in Ithaca, New York are trying something unique: They’re mobilizing support for an ordinance that would prohibit employers in that small city from firing their employees without just cause. If they succeed, they’ll have enacted the first such city-wide ban on arbitrary firings in the country.
Success in this effort will be a big deal, because in the United States, employment—unless otherwise restricted by law, collective bargaining agreement, or individual employment contract—is considered to be “at will.” This means that in the vast majority of cases, employers are entitled to fire workers at their whim, without warning or explanation.
A 2021 report from the National Employment Law Project (NELP) tells us that about half of US workers have been affected by unfair or arbitrary firings at some point in their lives, with devastating consequences for them and their families. Not surprisingly, then, a nationwide survey cited in the report found wide public support for just cause protections, including from 71% of voters in battleground states, with both Democratic and Republican majorities weighing in favorably.
Existing Restrictions on Employers' Right to Fire
Even without new federal, state, or local legislation, employers today face some limits to the at-will doctrine: federal and state laws, like Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, that bar various sorts of discrimination in the workplace; anti-retaliation statutes, like those included in the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and many other whistleblower-protection statutes; and section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act, that prohibits firing for union or other "concerted" activity. All these laws fall short of robustly protecting workers from retaliatory or discriminatory firings, however, largely because the burden is on the employee to prove the employer's illegal motivation—no simple feat—when under the general at-will rule the employer can fire the worker for no reason at all.
In addition to these limited statutory constraints on the at-will doctrine, over the past 50 or so years a number of state common law exceptions to the rule have developed. The most prevalent is the "public policy" exception, under which, in theory at least, employers can't fire workers for reasons that are contrary to public policy. Courts generally interpret the exception narrowly, applying it only to employees who exercise a clear legal right, perform a clear legal duty, or refuse to violate the law, or when the employer engaged in an “outrageous violation of a well-established public policy.”
Well-crafted state and local laws and ordinances, with accessible and effective enforcement mechanisms, have the potential to empower workers in new and game-changing ways, especially as federal protections erode before our eyes.
A second exception is the "implied contract of continuing employment" (at least theoretically available in 41 states and the District of Columbia). It's derived from employee handbooks, policies, and the like, that suggest protection from discharge except if the employee performs poorly, violates company policies, or has to be laid off because of the employer's economic necessity. Employers can generally get around this claim by expressly stating in their materials that the employee is working on an at-will basis, and that its various policies can be revised at any time, at the discretion of the employer.
Lastly, 11 states have read into the common law an "implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing," imposed on employers and employees, to act fairly. While theoretically this should prohibit firings without cause altogether, in actuality courts rarely find it applies, and then only in the most abusive cases. In other words, none of these common law carve outs from at-will employment have been particularly helpful to workers.
The Ithaca Ordinance
Which brings us to Ithaca’s legislative proposal. As the core provision of its current draft version (embedded at the Ithaca Just Cause website), the ordinance would prohibit discharge of an employee who has completed their (maximum 90-day) probationary period, for any reason other than just cause or a bona fide economic reason. In considering whether the just cause standard has been satisfied, the fact finder is to consider, among other things, whether the employer trained the worker on its performance requirements and bases for discipline, and whether the employer’s policy, rule, practice, or performance standard, including its use of progressive discipline, was reasonable and applied consistently.
Also, except in cases of egregious misconduct, the employer has to specifically notify the worker of what rules they violated or requirements they fell short of, and must utilize progressive discipline prior to firing. Similar notice of reasons is required before discharging a worker on account of bona fide economic necessity. Significantly, if an employee termination is to be upheld, the burden is on the employer to satisfy these requirements by a preponderance of the evidence.
The proposed legislation also adds a "Worker Rights" section to the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, and establishes a commission that would adjudicate complaints of violation. Complaints of violation can also be filed in court.
Retaliation against workers who exercise any of the rights granted by the legislation is expressly prohibited, and use of electronic surveillance as a tool for determining employee performance is restricted. Remedies for employees vary depending on the violation, and include back pay and damages, rescission of discipline and reinstatement, penalties, severance pay, injunctive relief, and attorneys’ fees.
Other Just Cause Efforts
The proposed ordinance echoes the recommendations laid out in these NELP and Roosevelt Institute reports. Published in 2021, both make the case for why this kind of municipal ordinance, or more potently, a comparable state law (or, as an even more radical aspiration, federal legislation, as promoted by Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders) is justified and overdue for all workers—with NELP focusing particularly on the disproportionate impact of at-will employment on people of color and immigrant workers, who face higher rates of wage theft, discrimination, and retaliation for asserting their rights than the employee population at large.
It should come as no surprise, but it's still shameful, that this country lags far behind many other nations—Australia, Brazil, Japan, Mexico, the United Kingdom, and most of the European Union, to name a few—in providing just-cause protections against arbitrary and unfair firings. Which is why what the Ithaca coalition is doing is really worth noticing. But it's not the first city to take this on: Philadelphia led the (notably small) pack when, in 2019, its city council enacted a just cause termination ordinance for the city's approximately 1,000 parking lot attendants. New York City was next, enacting a comparable ordinance protecting its fast food workers in 2021. Also in New York City, a diverse coalition of unions, advocacy organizations, and high road employers are pressing for passage of a Secure Jobs Act covering all employees who work in the city. With its newly elected democratic socialist mayor Zohran Mamdani, it just might succeed.
The US territories of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands have just cause laws. In Illinois, a Secure Jobs Act, pressed by Raise the Floor Alliance and a broad array of allies, was introduced in the state legislature in 2021, but has yet to be enacted. In what might come as a surprise, Montana is the only state in the US to have enacted just cause legislation, and it's been on the books for decades. While not nearly as progressive as the Ithaca, New York City, and Illinois models, it is unique in prohibiting, state-wide, firings without good cause.
Will Just Cause Laws Hamper Unionization Efforts?
Some may be concerned that just cause legislation could undercut unions' ability to successfully organize, since that's a key benefit they can provide in collective bargaining agreements. But there are a number of arguments that cut the other way—including that if firing without good cause is made illegal and is readily enforceable, it creates a more effective impediment to employers' efforts to get rid of pro-union activists than the weak and slow remedies the National Labor Relations Act has to offer. And, just cause for all workers would provide a floor, not a ceiling, for union negotiations for even better protections against improper firings at unionized workplaces.
Parting Thoughts
Worker rights advocates should watch Ithaca Just Cause's initiative with keen interest. It also should give food for thought—and inspiration—for those of us who live in other cities and states. It’s clear that just cause protections are popular with workers across party lines. Well-crafted state and local laws and ordinances, with accessible and effective enforcement mechanisms, have the potential to empower workers in new and game-changing ways, especially as federal protections erode before our eyes. For those of us in locales where this might be possible, maybe it's time to give it a try.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Labor Movement Cheers as House Members Force Vote to Restore Federal Workers' Union Rights
"We commend every Democrat and Republican who signed the discharge petition to bring the Protect America's Workforce Act to a vote, but the fight isn't over," said AFL-CIO president Liz Shuler.
Nov 17, 2025
Two Republicans in the US House of Representatives on Monday added their names to a discharge petition that will now force a vote on legislation to restore the collective bargaining rights of hundreds of thousands of federal workers targeted by GOP President Donald Trump.
US Reps. Jared Golden (D-Maine) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) responded to Trump's legally contentious executive order by introducing the Protect America's Workforce Act in April. They began collecting petition signatures in June. At least 218 members had to sign it to override House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and force a vote on the bill.
Two New York Republicans, Congressmen Nick LaLota and Mike Lawler, signed the petition on Monday. It was previously signed by the sponsors, House Democrats, and GOP Reps. Rob Bresnahan (Pa.) and Don Bacon (Neb.). Their move came on the heels of an end to the longest government shutdown in US history, which left some federal workers furloughed and others working without pay.
"Every American deserves the right to have a voice in the workplace, including those who serve their country every single day. Supporting workers and ensuring good government are not opposing ideas," Lawler said in a statement. "They go hand in hand. Restoring collective bargaining rights strengthens our federal workforce and helps deliver more effective, accountable service to the American people."
"Speaker Johnson has run out of excuses to delay a vote on this legislation to restore federal workers' rights."
Golden, a former Blue Dog Coalition co-chair who recently announced his plans to retire from Congress after this term, thanked the newest signatories for joining the fight for his bill.
"America never voted to eliminate workers’ union rights, and the strong bipartisan support for my bill shows that Congress will not stand idly by while President Trump nullifies federal workers’ collective bargaining agreements and rolls back generations of labor law," Golden said. "I'm grateful to Reps. LaLota and Lawler for bringing this discharge petition over the finish line, and I'm calling on Speaker Mike Johnson to schedule a clean, up-or-down vote on this bill."
Liz Shuler, president of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), the country's largest federation of unions, similarly welcomed the latest signatures and set her sights on the House speaker.
"The labor movement fought back against the largest act of union-busting in American history by doing what we do best: organizing," Shuler said in a Monday statement. "Working people built a bipartisan coalition to restore union rights to federal workers in the face of unprecedented attacks on our freedoms. We commend every Democrat and Republican who signed the discharge petition to bring the Protect America’s Workforce Act to a vote, but the fight isn't over."
"Speaker Johnson has run out of excuses to delay a vote on this legislation to restore federal workers' rights," she continued. "It's time to bring the Protect America's Workforce Act to a vote and restore federal workers' right to collectively bargain and have a voice on the job."
Other discharge petitions might be more salacious, but it is HUGE news tonight that two Republicans just got the Protect America’s Workforce Act discharge petition to 218 to restore federal workers’ union rights.Let’s get the job done. ✊
[image or embed]
— Lauren Miller (@laurenmiller.bsky.social) November 17, 2025 at 6:18 PM
Everett Kelley, national president of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE)—which is the largest federal workers union, representing 820,000 people in the federal and District of Columbia governments—also applauded the development on Monday.
"An independent, apolitical civil service is one of the bedrocks of American democracy," Kelley said in a statement. "Today, lawmakers stood up together to defend that principle and to affirm that federal workers must retain their right to collective bargaining. This is what leadership looks like."
"Federal workers do their jobs every day without regard to politics. Today's action honors that commitment," Kelley asserted.
"AFGE will continue fighting until these essential rights are fully restored, including by fighting to retain Section 1110 of the must-pass National Defense Authorization Act," he vowed, referring to an amendment to the NDAA that restores bargaining rights to hundreds of thousands of civilians working in the US Department of Defense.
While discharge petitions are rarely successful, this one secured the necessary 218 signatures following a similar victory last week, when the newest member of Congress, Rep. Adelita Grijalva (D-Ariz.), signed her name to an effort to force a vote on releasing files related to deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Don't Cross the Picket Line': No Kings Alliance Backs Starbucks Boycott During Workers Strike
"Today’s strike isn’t just about Starbucks. It's about a broken system where billionaires and CEOs keep getting richer while the politicians they bankroll gut our wages, healthcare, and rights."
Nov 14, 2025
The No Kings Alliance on Friday announced that it was mobilizing in support of Starbucks workers who went on strike this week to demand a fair contract.
The alliance, which organized one of the largest demonstrations in US history last month with nationwide "No Kings" protests against the President Donald Trump's administration, pledged solidarity with the striking workers, while highlighting the massive disparity in pay for Starbucks baristas and the company's CEO.
"Starbucks CEO Brian Niccol was paid $96 million for just 120 days of work in 2024, paying himself 6,666 times what the average barista made—the worst CEO-to-worker pay inequity in the country," said the alliance. "At the same time, Trump and his billionaire backers are doing their best to scare people out of speaking up for their rights on the job and in their communities."
"Don't cross the picket line," the alliance urged its supporters, while also encouraging them to sign the "No Contract, No Coffee" pledge, an online petition demanding that the company negotiate with Starbucks Workers United (SBWU) on a just contract.
"I call on you to bargain a fair contract with Starbucks Workers United baristas!" the pledge reads. "I support Starbucks baristas in their fight for a union and a fair contract, and pledge not to cross the picket line. That means I will not patronize any Starbucks store when baristas are on [unfair labor practices] strike."
The striking Starbucks workers also got a pledge of solidarity from the AFL-CIO, which on Thursday urged the company to hammer out a deal with its workers to ensure fair pay and schedules.
"For four long years, SBWU members have fought tirelessly for better pay, fair hours, and adequate staffing for more than 12,000 workers and counting," said AFL-CIO president Liz Shuler. "Yet Starbucks has dug its heels in, engaging in shameless and persistent union busting... We urge Niccol and Starbucks corporate executives to finally do right by the workers who drive the company’s profit and negotiate a long-overdue fair contract."
SEIU pledged support for the Starbucks workers, while also placing the strike in the context of the broader fight between labor and capital.
"Today’s strike isn’t just about Starbucks," the union wrote in a social media post. "It’s about a broken system where billionaires and CEOs keep getting richer while the politicians they bankroll gut our wages, healthcare, and rights. Baristas are fighting for a fair contract and for a more just society."
Some progressive politicians also gave the striking workers a shoutout.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) vowed to keep out of Starbucks franchises until the workers' demands are met.
"When we strike, we win!" Tlaib exclaimed.
New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani joined the Starbucks boycott and encouraged all of his supporters to follow suit.
"Together, we can send a powerful message: No contract, no coffee," the democratic socialist wrote.
Democratic socialist Seattle Mayor-elect Katie Wilson—whose city is home to the coffee giant's headquarters—attended an SBWU rally where she joined them on the picket line and said, "I am not buying Starbucks, and you should not either."
Socialist Seattle Mayor-elect Katie Wilson's first move after winning the election was to boycott Starbucks, a hometown company. pic.twitter.com/zPoNULxfuk
— Ari Hoffman 🎗 (@thehoffather) November 14, 2025
Starbucks workers began their strike on Thursday, and SBWU has warned the company that it is prepared to dig in for a long fight unless it returns to the negotiating table.
Negotiations between the union and Starbucks stalled out last spring, and more than 90% of unionized baristas last week voted to authorize a strike intended to hit the company during the busy holiday season.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular