I think Patler is trying to ask a broader question: Should employers be able to terminate someone who has committed a transgression outside of work and work hours, regardless of industry or monopoly status?

I assume for the sake of my argument that the transgression in question does not impair the ability of the person to work (or be available to work) and does no harm (financial or PR) to the firm in question. So I am not considering the case of a cab driver booked on a DUI charge.

My answer is yes, they should, because absent specifically negotiated due process in a contract (personal services or Union), I am not sure such a matter can be adjudicated easily in a Court or arbitration hearing. But I am open to the argument that at will employment confers a greater advantage of information to the employer than to the employee.