Yes it is. The known working conditions and the hazards are part of what the job is. Failing to disclose that fully is deception.
As we have seen so many times, you have a tendency to try to discuss things that you obviously know nothing about, and then try to change the subject when you get caught. Known working conditions and hazards are very different from your initial claim, that the store owner had an obligation to tell you how many times the store has been robbed and employees injured.
You are confusing right to work with at will employment; they are different. There is no contract with at will employment. The employer in an at will employment condition can do just Kerberos said they could.
As mentioned before, try to learn something about a topic if you want to talk about it. First, you are the one confused, as Keberos was discussing right to work, not at will. From Kerberos:
"Most states are right to work. So if your employer decides to pay you less all he/she has to do is give you the choice of "accepting" a lower salary or taking a pink slip. So much for having a contract and abiding by it." -AND-
That's the point of "right to work", there is no contract. They can dismiss you for any reason at any time. Second, even with at-will employment, if there is a contract the contract is considered enforceable for the duration of the contract, barring certain events. For example, the Texas workforce Commission points out, "the basic rule of Texas employment law is employment at will, which applies to all phases of the employment relationship -
it means that absent a statute or an express agreement (such as an employment contract) to the contrary, either party in an employment relationship may modify any of the terms or conditions of employment, or terminate the relationship altogether, for any reason, or no particular reason at all, with or without advance notice." Such contractual conditions are normal for at-will employment.
No, but the company wanting to keep it secret and threatening to fire you for revealing it for their own selfish reasons is.
So what? I know this is really hard for you sometimes, but try to stay on the topic, which is honesty between employer and employee.
Which is the real nub of the issue.
No, the nub of the issue is whether it is ethical and honest to accept money by pretending to be doing something that one is intentionally not doing.
Again, it is really simple here: Let's face it, if folks didn't think it was wrong they wouldn't have this need to hide it.