united-states employment washington
Can a US employer hire someone as a salaried worker, require them to work long hours, and then fire?
<p>I have a friend who began a job at a large firm as an auditor at the end of 2017. The nature of this work is that there are two seasons: a busy season (Q1 and part of Q2 of any given year) and a slow season (the rest of the year). This feature of the work is part of what is advertised to new employees. This friend worked the busy season (60-80 hr weeks) and was recently fired as the slow season (20-40 hours) approached. Is it lawful for an employer to terminate an employee under the (here false) pretense of receiving some benefit (here shorter hours) for extremely difficult work (very long hours) at the beginning? This is of course assuming that the employee was doing fine work and was only fired since their use had already run its course. It feels as though this should not be allowed since, as an employer, I could continually higher people to do difficult work in the promise that something great will return later. It seems like a way to (essentially) hire hourly workers and require them to work overtime while not paying overtime (after reading the laws I believe this friend was exempt from overtime pay).</p>

<p>If it helps, the state is Washington.</p>

<p>Washington State is an "At Will" employment state meaning that, with exception to some protected classes and bargaining, the employer may terminate the employee for any reason the employer can cite, or no reason at all.  If the firm used it as a benefit of the job but it wasn't agreed upon on the contract, its not a deception as if you can hold the job to the down season, you have less work to do.  If a promise was made for employment into the down season during the negotiating of the job, and this was documented, it could be.  It could be that he did all the work required of him, but another higher went above and beyond and he got the ax because he was the newest and the lesser performer.</p>

<p>Either way, the employer is well within their right to fire an employee for any reason they choose absent discrimination based on protected class status.</p>
