Not all politicians hate us apparently

[sf_erika]

Yes, I was confused.  It is employee at will.

Georgia is both an employment-at-will state and a right-to-work state.  They mean different things though.  "Right to work" is the name of the set of laws that allow you to opt out of paying union dues as part of your job, which can effectively kill unions or allow you to be free from them (depending on how you view unions). 

At-will employment, like you said, means that you can be terminated for (almost) any reason.  You just can't be terminated for an illegal reason (and there are only a few that are illegal - like some forms of discrimination).

To answer my own question above in case anyone cares: There are indeed trans-inclusive anti-discrimination work laws in Atlanta at least.

That is true.  But it's also my understanding that there are no teeth behind Atlanta's anti-discrimination rules.  I know firsthand of someone who was fired from his Atlanta job after coming out as gay.  This ordinance, unfortunately didn't help him out much, and he didn't really have grounds to sue because sexual orientation is not protected under state or federal law.  In other words, the Atlanta ordinance wasn't enough to base a lawsuit on. 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SailorMars1994]

I think it is a north vs south thing. Republican Charlie Baker seems to be supporting trans right at will, something I doubt many southern Republicans would do openly and strongly. Its more of a region thing then a wing thing. On LGBT the national Democrats are very supportive, while the GOP is split between a more supportive northern members and strongly opposed southern member. Granted, this isnt new. Before like 1968 it was the Republicans that near universally supported civil rights whereas the Democrats were split  with a supportive northren wing and a hard core opposed southern wing.