I don't understand all of the close votes on my question here.

In my opinion my question is clear and is not

  • A legal question
  • Too specific (unless the community considers the entire country of Australia to be "too specific.")

Please justify these close votes.

If people are confused or didn't read the key question, in bold, or voted to close after briefly skimming the question, then they shouldn't be voting to close!

I implore people to vote to reopen, since it meets none of the vote to close reasons.

  • The question (in its current form) seems clear and on-topic to me. May 4 '15 at 15:12

Please justify these close votes.

I don't know why folks voted to close. Here at stackexchange it's not required that anyone justify any of their votes.

If I had to guess, I'd say that the phrase "can I even resign or am I bound by the contract?" comes across as requiring legal counsel for a proper answer.

"Bound by the contract" pretty much demands a legal interpretation, don't you think?

Perhaps you could revise the question?

If people are confused or didn't read the key question, in bold, or voted to close after briefly skimming the question, then they shouldn't be voting to close!

I understand your opinion. But people can and do vote however they choose, even if some think they shouldn't be allowed to vote.

  • I have removed that phrase and attempted to make it even more clear that the question is for the general situation in Australia for employment contracts, but it was still closed.
    – daaxix
    May 4 '15 at 0:07

Caveat: I didn't vote to close.

As an Australian who has worked in a couple of industries over the past 25 years, the question can't reasonably answered as a generic case. Within an industry I have had different sets of employment and termination conditions. Within an organisation I have seen different conditions, depending on what Enterprise Bargaining Agreement was entered into.

So to give a generic, sweeping answer IS to broad too cover all cases within Australia. There are far too many variations to possibly be answered in the Stack Exchange Q&A format.

  • Well, in general, if there are no specific terms about resignation in the agreements, isn't there a reasonable answer? For instance, here in the US, there are some at will employment or right to work questions, and of course the specifics vary, but at will employment is broad enough that it isn't considered off topic.
    – daaxix
    May 4 '15 at 2:38
  • @daaxix I don't know what "at will employment" is in the sense given, so I can't give you an comparison on it. Here we have awards, but again they are very much industry specific. And beyond not giving worse conditions than the minimum allowable, there are certainly many variations from employment contract to employment contract.
    – Jane S
    May 4 '15 at 2:41
  • Perhaps the question is, afterall, too specific, but for instance, it is common knowledge in the USA that, generally, a person may resign or quit for any reason with no notice, and a company may fire or lay off for any reason which isn't in a special protected off limits list, also with no notice. In Australia more employment seems to be governed by employment contracts, so are you saying that there is no general sense of when and how and the general rules of resigning/quitting? I have already found that both employees and employers are bound by a notice period for example...
    – daaxix
    May 4 '15 at 3:12
  • @daaxix Actually I'm saying that the rules are too diverse to generalise :)
    – Jane S
    May 4 '15 at 3:16
  • @daaxix The reason why at-will employment is on-topic is because that is US labor law. It is not simply something that is widely used in employment contracts - it is absolutely true for (most) employment contracts in the US. If that law were not in place, then answering questions about employment and resignation terms would be considered off-topic.
    – David K
    May 4 '15 at 12:44

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .