Amazon to force 'voluntary resignation' on workers who don't relocate • Hacker News Board

Re: Amazon to force 'voluntary resignation' on workers who don't relocate

#31

Post by sidlls » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 2:30 PM UTC

o1y32 wrote: post #5

horns4lyfe wrote: post #4

Are they also, going to give all their commuting employees electric cars, to align with their “climate pledge”? Doubt it, but I’m sure their executives will still lecture the rest of us about climate change.

In other news I heard that the traffic in downtown Seattle is horrible after Amazon's return-to-office mandate. (Learned this second hand, please correct me if wrong)

This happened in the Bay Area, too. Prior to everyone adopting "RTO" (return to office) policies, my commute to the office regardless of the day was about 20 minutes (leaving from SF). After, on Tuesdays through Thursdays, it can easily be 30-40 minutes. And getting back home? Horrible. Before RTO I could leave the office at 4 or 5 and be back in my nice apartment within a half hour. Now it takes 10 fuckin minutes just to get off on Sixth Street after a 20-30 minute drive. And if there's a wreck on the 80 going to the east bay forget it--it's another 10-20 minutes just to get through the last 2 blocks of traffic.

Re: Amazon to force 'voluntary resignation' on workers who don't relocate

#32

Post by linuxftw » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 2:31 PM UTC

If only there were some way the employees could band together and negotiate equitable terms of employment.

Re: Amazon to force 'voluntary resignation' on workers who don't relocate

#33

Post by andsoitis » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 2:32 PM UTC

tedajax wrote: post #24

andsoitis wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Still a firing, false choice etc... Why do you view it as a false choice?

Because saying "you can keep your job if you uproot your life" isn't a fair choice.

> Because saying "you can keep your job if you uproot your life" isn't a fair choice.

Surely an employer and employee are free to choose the employment terms and when the terms are deemed unacceptable to either, they can part ways?

If you're a top notch Amazon engineer, for example, and you don't want to uproot your life it would be fairly easy to find another job that is more suitable, don't you think? All employment relationships have tradeoffs.

Re: Amazon to force 'voluntary resignation' on workers who don't relocate

#34

Post by zer8k » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 2:32 PM UTC

yodsanklai wrote: post #10

How a forced "voluntary resignation" is different from a being fired? is it some corporate euphemism or is it a thing?

It's a way to avoid paying severance. Most companies do it but it's not talked about because it's highly illegal. Essentially, you can just assign someone menial tasks, refuse to promote them, etc until they leave. There's nothing illegal about doing that (if it occurs "naturally").

It's called constructive dismissal. The burden of proof is on the employee and it's a very high bar. If the employer has any excuse it won't work. "We didn't have enough work for them", or "there was no budget for promotion" would be sufficient to squash the case.

Re: Amazon to force 'voluntary resignation' on workers who don't relocate

#35

Post by dh2022 » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 2:32 PM UTC

This is the Amazon I know! This is the Amazon I worked for 4 years. Every time I wonder if things changed one of these stories pops up. And reinforces my resolve to never work for this piece-of-** company unless I cannot make my next mortgage payment.

Re: Amazon to force 'voluntary resignation' on workers who don't relocate

#36

Post by freedrock87 » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 2:33 PM UTC

andsoitis wrote: post #15

yodsanklai wrote: post #10

How a forced "voluntary resignation" is different from a being fired? is it some corporate euphemism or is it a thing?

> How a forced "voluntary resignation" is different from a being fired? is it some corporate euphemism or is it a thing? It is different in that you have a choice. You can either adapt to the new policy (work conditions change) or you can leave. Totally up to you.

Its called constructive dismissal. Of course you have a choice to work from 10pm to 6am every day on a park bench but under US law the person is considered "fired" due significant changes in their work environment.

Re: Amazon to force 'voluntary resignation' on workers who don't relocate

#37

Post by zer8k » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 2:34 PM UTC

jmclnx wrote: post #23

sydon wrote: post #12

How can they force their employees to resign, if they're going back on the terms they made before? I'm not familiar with American labour laws but this sounds illegal.

I do not know how they can do this also, but it depends upon the State. I think "blue" states Amazon would not be able to do this, "red" states I think anything goes. Red State Gov. only cares about not giving poor people money.

Federal employment law doesn't depend on the "color" of a state.

Re: Amazon to force 'voluntary resignation' on workers who don't relocate

#38

Post by kube-system » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 2:34 PM UTC

sydon wrote: post #12

How can they force their employees to resign, if they're going back on the terms they made before? I'm not familiar with American labour laws but this sounds illegal.

Generally speaking, employees in the US can be fired for almost any reason, as long as it isn’t for an illegal reason. While Amazon isn’t calling this “firing”, forcing someone to resign is essentially the same thing as far as the law is concerned.

Re: Amazon to force 'voluntary resignation' on workers who don't relocate

#39

Post by flappyeagle » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 2:35 PM UTC

Before the flood of remote work die-hards start to flood this thread I want to implore you to spend that energy making better tools for remote collaborating.

It’s been 3 years since we started social distancing and exactly nothing is different today vs then.

We are still stuck in Notion, Zoom, and Slack. The unlucky ones are on MS Teams.

Remote learning is terrible for most people, remote training is similar. Ad hoc collaboration is still high friction, dev environments are highly local (where’s figma for web dev?)

Some of you are highly skilled and use these existing tools optimally but you don’t have the elevation to see that huge swaths of the workforce are struggling.

Re: Amazon to force 'voluntary resignation' on workers who don't relocate

#40

Post by Majromax » Tue, Jul 25, 2023, 2:35 PM UTC

hirundo wrote: post #25

CoolGuySteve wrote: post #13

"In employment law, constructive dismissal, also called constructive discharge or constructive termination, occurs when an employee resigns as a result of the employer creating a hostile work environment. Since the resignation was not truly voluntary, it is, in effect, a termination. For example, when an employer places extraordinary and unreasonable work demands on an employee to obtain their resignation, this can c…

I'm a remote worker who would quit before returning to the office. But even so I can't interpret a requirement to be non-remote as "a hostile work environment", "extraordinary", or "unreasonable". But yes, it does look more like a termination than a voluntary resignation.

> But even so I can't interpret a requirement to be non-remote as "a hostile work environment", "extraordinary", or "unreasonable". But yes, it does look more like a termination than a voluntary resignation.

I think a unilateral change to the employment contract that substantially changes the character of the work (from fully remote to in-person) could fairly easily be described as 'unreasonable', just as if your employer decided to cut your salary in half.

The fate of any potential case would probably come down to the reasonable expectations of the parties. If there was a common understanding that remote work was permanent, then a unilateral change would be unreasonable; if the remote work was time-limited, probationary, or a trial, then the change might be reasonable even if undesired.