You have a point, and I share your general concern with bureaucracy. However, I'd encourage you to consider how I've seen employment law situations like this pl

You have a point, and I share your general concern with bureaucracy. However, I'd encourage you to consider how I've seen employment law situations like this play out in practice. Some examples: * Management pressuring someone to forge tax documents, and firing said employee when they refused. They even provided a written statement stating this as the reason. * Someone getting fired for refusing to use grant funding outside of its designated purpose. * A government employee was accused of corruption and was asked to step down quietly. The city wanted this employee's replacement to take money from one part of the budget for a hush-money payout, while keeping this secret from the city council. * Someone taking maternity leave, then having her role eliminated. She was given the opportunity to apply for a new job when she returned from mat leave. * Someone getting laid off while on mat leave. No option for another role. On paper, all of this was highly illegal, and any employer operating in good faith should have been able to work out a solution when confronted. All of them dug in their heels and refused to consider that they were wrong. Followup generally looked like this: * Employee escalates within the organization. This becomes a negotiation, where the org decides how much leverage they have. Note that the org might not read the law carefully or even at all. If it's gotten to this point, they've often already decided they can get away with it. * Depending on the circumstances, reporting to some government agency may happen. There may or may not be an agency that can help. Even if there is, don't expect to become a priority or have significant resources devoted to you. * More negotiation. The org may have lawyers who are already on salary, or at least an HR department that's ready to step in. You likely do not, and need to track down and pay for your own attorney. * After a lot negotiation, there's some kind of settlement. If this has to go to a lawsuit, good luck paying for those additional costs and managing everything. Meanwhile, you need to find a new job. For the people you're negotiating against, it's just another day at the office and they have all the time in the world. Having multiple statutes to establish legal claims can be redundant and annoying. It can also reduce ambiguity when negotiating with an employer who is unwilling or unable to respect their liability. Which ends up being more important will be influenced by the details of the laws and the circumstances of each situation. This doesn't obviate your point, which I agree is important. It's dumb and sad that this is where we are.