So in the US you don't have to give explanations? Damn that sucks for the ex-employee. In France you have to write a report in order to fire someone unless they're in their trial period.
Which is why people HATE to hire in France: it's so hard to undo a bad hiring decision that no one will take a chance on a candidate who only "might" work out.
The right solution, in my opinion, is allow fire-at-will like we do in California, and have thorough unemployment benefits so that it's not worth making a fuss over.
But that's what the trial period for, isn't it? If you can't figure out in 6 months (typical trial period in Germany) if he's a good fit, you have a problem anyway.
It differs by state in the U.S. (business law being left to the states, by and large). California is an "at-will" state, where you can be terminated by a firm with no notice, for no reason. However, California also has strong unemployment insurance regulations, a healthy litigation industry, and corporate laws that tend to shift more liability to employers than employees. I was able to tell an employee I fired that his performance was not up-to-par, but I had pretty substantial written documentation prepared in advance. It is certainly the case in California that you don't give recommendations to ex-employees nor provide unsuccessful job candidates with detailed feedback.
Some other states are more employer friendly, and others are less.
