I look at an employer/employee relationship as being like any other business relationship or contract. It's not "please sir, may I have a job? I'll do anything!", it's: Let's come to an agreement where I agree to trade some of my time/expertise/energy for compensation. In that scenario, one side does not have the right to unilaterally change the terms of that contract. They can negotiate change, but they cannot dictate. Refusal to negotiate such changes is tantamount to a breach of contract and will be dealt with accordingly.
Your views on the employer/employee relations are pretty far off in an "at will" state. Here's an example... A company decides to change from one IT networking system, email system, or software package to another. They will then dictate to their employees that they WILL work on the new systems. There's no negotiation. The company employees WILL use the new systems. The IT staff will either comply and learn the new system (usually by spending every waking hour of their own time trying to learn the new system) or they'll have to find a new employer.
Given your views, a company's employeesand IT staff could keep the company from switching to new systems.
Mark
That is not even CLOSE to the same as directing that female staff dress up in skimpy costumes. Unless the costume (notice I’m not calling it a uniform as it doesn’t deserve to be referred to as such. Uniforms are what policemen, or Airline employees etc. wear) is a bona fide part of the employee’s job (think Disney as an example), then the employer doesn’t really have much of an argument. I notice that several people have trotted out “At Will” as an justification, which is fine and on principle I agree with the right of a business owner to run their business as they see fit. However you have to admit that what they’ve done here is a pretty greasy thing to do. That’s definitely a business that I wouldn’t be patronizing.