Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 106 posts

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

#41

Post by Aurornis »

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…

If they did this to a single employee without good reason, that employee might have a case.

If they institute a company-wide policy and apply it by default to everyone, an individual could not argue that the company constructively dismissed them.

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

#42

Post by fullshark »

These companies were counting on a major economic downturn to scare employees back, and since that didn't happen are now going to use mandates and accept some increased attrition. It will work cause they all overhired like crazy, but maybe one in ten of the employees that quits as a result was truly essential and there will be some chaos internally as a result.

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

#44

Post by wiml »

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)

It's true, but it was horrible pre-pandemic, too. I'm not sure it's worse now. (Source: have lived here for a while.)

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

#45

Post by adastra22 »

tptacek wrote: post #22
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…

That matters when employees have contracts promising termination only with cause. But these employees are likely all at-will; they can be fired for having the wrong hair cut.

This is unrelated to “with Cause” conditions in employment contracts. This is about qualifying for unemployment and other benefits.

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

#46

Post by coredog64 »

zer8k wrote: post #34
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 w…

This seems more cut-and-dried. Many of these employees were hired with their official location as “virtual”, so there’s proof of a change by the company.

The other thing that is happening concurrently at Amazon is Return To Team (RTT). Let’s say that you didn’t get hired with “virtual” as your location, but Seattle. Your leadership has decided that the center of mass for your team is Austin (or Tempe, or Arlington). Not only do you have to RTO, you have to return to that office.

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

#47

Post by danaris »

tptacek wrote: post #22
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…

That matters when employees have contracts promising termination only with cause. But these employees are likely all at-will; they can be fired for having the wrong hair cut.

Constructive dismissal isn't about whether it's legal or not to do it. It is, however, relevant to things like unemployment benefits—my wife, for instance, had her job changed on her just as the lockdowns were beginning, to something she had already made it very clear she was adamantly unwilling to do (and this was a complete change in title, responsibilities, department, the whole works), and after she had been instrumental in some reports that were pretty critical of the administration and (indirectly) supportive of unionization. She quit, and had no trouble (at least, no more than usual) getting the state to agree she deserved unemployment.

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

#48

Post by anonym29 »

andsoitis wrote: post #18
turnsout wrote: post #11

Can you imagine being asked to move to a different city, go into the office, only to use Chime all day? The only people who will agree are the ones who sadly have no alternative.

> The only people who will agree are the ones who sadly have no alternative. Many people will continue to choose to work at Amazon and specifically because they want to be around other colleagues a few days in the week. It is pretty presumptive and insulting to say to someone like that that they're in a "sad" position and they are "victims".

Exhibit 1. A 'Hacker News' post by a user exhibiting the tell-tale emotionally-charged defense of their abuser, a classic hallmark of Stockholm Syndrome.

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

#50

Post by Aurornis »

Majromax wrote: post #40
hirundo wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 emp…

> I think a unilateral change to the employment contract

These employees do not have employment contracts.

It sounds nit-picky if you’re unfamiliar with the law, but it’s very important that companies avoid giving the suggestion that there is an “employment contract”

Regardless, this is a company-wide policy change, not an action against an individual.

Companies close offices, shutter departments, and pull out of regions while giving employees to the opportunity to relocate all the time. This is well-trodden territory and it’s not constructive dismissal against an individual.

Post reply on HN