Talk:Employment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Employment article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	This article is within the scope of the Economics WikiProject, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve economics-related articles..
B	rated as B-Class on the assessment scale
Mid	rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale

	This article is supported by the Sociology WikiProject, which gives a central approach to sociology and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Employment, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

	This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
	This article has been selected for Version 0.7 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.
Additional information: Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. Feel free to make short comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. ??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale. This article is included in the 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection, or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version. Please maintain high quality standards and, if possible, stick to GFDL-compatible images. This article is one of the supplemental core articles, which every encyclopedia should have.

Contents 1 Original conversation 2 Need some balance 3 Tax protester rhetoric removed 4 Bread and butter redirects here? 5 Contracts 6 Films? 7 WikiProject class rating 8 Possible Employment project/subproject

[edit] Original conversation

Where would be a good place to talk about different theories relating to work, such as Calvinist theology, Marxism, and surrealist (and otherjyspposition to work? --Daniel C. Boyer 21:18, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I just deleted a huge page of "Incredible Offers 4 U". I ran across it on a google of the country of En for "lol". I'm saddened it took over a month for this to be found. --207.181.42.20 14:21, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

This article as written is very biased to a US viewpoint. What about a section on international employment highlighting the differences in employment contracts/ideas around the world.

Would it be appropriate to include external link to jobforum.ca, which is a free employment forum? --Smartweb 01:58, October 21 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but no. See Wikipedia's External links policy; adding forums and blogs is discouraged. -- Mwanner | Talk 12:51, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Need some balance

This article appears to written from a far too capitalistic paradigm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.171.25.34 (talk) 22:49, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tax protester rhetoric removed

The following material was removed as frivolous tax protester rhetoric:

For the purposes of taxation 26 USC § 3401 (c) defines it this way: (c) Employee 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.

Note that it is very specific as to exactely who is an employee and does not include many of the persons that we normally think of when we think of the word employee. And this is the very reason that the government had to define it as such because the income tax is voluntary for unincorporated individuals in the United States.

The above material appears to be calculated to give the false impression that "employee" for tax purposes means only the persons listed in section 3401(c). The statement that section 3401(c) "is very specific as to exactely [sic; should read "exactly"] who is an employee and does not include many of the persons that we normally think of when we think of the word employee" (emphasis added) is incorrect as a matter of law. Nothing in section 3401 limits the definition of "employee" to just those persons specifically listed in section 3401(c). The key is the word "includes." See 26 U.S.C. § 7701(c). Sorry, tax protesters. Famspear 16:45, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

PS, in case you missed it, section 7701(c) states:

The terms “includes” and “including” when used in a definition contained in this title shall not be deemed to exclude other things otherwise within the meaning of the term defined.

26 U.S.C. section 7701(c). Yours, Famspear 16:46, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bread and butter redirects here?

Okay. Bread and butter redirects here. The phrase Bread and butter is used to refer to more than just this. The word bread nor butter are even mentioned! We need a disambig... or something.

[edit] Contracts

In the United States, the standard employment contract is considered to be at-will meaning that the employer and employee are both free to terminate the employment at any time and for any cause, or for no cause at all.

What's the situation in other countries? Does one get sued or jailed for quitting a job as a stock boy in Mexico City, London, or Bangladesh? If the situation is different elsewhere, it should be explained. If not, the "in the United States" statement should be removed. I'm pretty sure that throughout the free world, the typical laborer can leave employment at will. There are exceptions, of course, but that's why the word "standard" is there. Kafziel ^Talk 19:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Is it really a contract, classical contract theory requires freedom to contract, and equal power position of contracting parties. Doe a person without sufficent money have a real choice about the terms of the contract they enter into????JUBALCAIN 06:30, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes. The theory is that the worker possesses something of value and that it could be "sold" somewhere else if need-be. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 15:12, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Films?

This is a general article and these two links for movies don't quite fit. Yes office space is about unhappy employees but do we need this kind of popular culture in this article? I suggest they are removed.24.218.19.211 22:24, 15 January 2007 (UTC)1/15/07

[edit] WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 16:24, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possible Employment project/subproject

There is now a proposed WikiProject or subproject to deal with wikipedia's content relating to employment, including the articles on the various professions and jobs, at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Employment. Any interested parties should indicate as much there. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 14:08, 13 March 2008 (UTC)