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

61–70 of 106 posts

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

#61

Post by andsoitis »

anonym29 wrote: post #48
andsoitis wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

> defense of their abuser

I personally wouldn't choose to work for Amazon, for their remote work policy but also many other reasons.

But I do believe it is insulting to say to someone who makes a clearly thought out tradeoff decision that it is where they want to work (e.g. someone who already lives in Seattle) that they are victims. Just because it doesn't suit your preferences, doesn't mean it doesn't suit others' perfectly well.

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

#62

Post by zarathustreal »

This was already happening, I was laid off from AWS back in May with the other 9,000 employees and the vast majority of people laid off were the fully-remote employees far enough from an office to have a valid reason to stay remote. This is just AWS getting more bold about it

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

#63

Post by grayhatter »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #60
RollAHardSix wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I live in an at-will state, you can absolutely file for constructive dismissal. And SHOULD. If you can do your job remotely, have been doing your job remotely, and the company wants to end that? Then the company absolutely needs to be challenged and burdened with showing proof as to why returning to the office is necessary when it does create an unreasonable burden on the employee. For anyone who says this isn't…

If they won a case for constructive dismissal, what do you think they would win?

their self respect?

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

#64

Post by tiltowait »

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?

"You must do X to keep your job," where X in this case is something onerous but still doable for most (like moving to a different city so you can work in-office). If you refuse to do the onerous thing, then you're voluntarily refusing to do that which keeps your job. Therefore, it's a voluntary resignation.

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

#65

Post by RollAHardSix »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #60
RollAHardSix wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I live in an at-will state, you can absolutely file for constructive dismissal. And SHOULD. If you can do your job remotely, have been doing your job remotely, and the company wants to end that? Then the company absolutely needs to be challenged and burdened with showing proof as to why returning to the office is necessary when it does create an unreasonable burden on the employee. For anyone who says this isn't…

If they won a case for constructive dismissal, what do you think they would win?

Unemployment benefits. Possibly a position retained remotely if it progresses to legal arbitration. But more importantly, precedent for other workers & the hit to unemployment insurance for the company. Obviously with Amazon's size its different but that unemployment insurance cost matters to most companies.

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

#66

Post by zarathustreal »

reportgunner wrote: post #9

> "collaborating and inventing is easier and more effective when we're in person." I read this as "when we're in prison" for some reason and couldn't believe someone would seriously say that.

My favorite part of working there when this started being pushed was “source?” And the reply being “trust us bro”

It’s so hilariously mismanaged..the execs are just useful idiots for the globalist agenda at this point

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

#67

Post by linuxftw »

40yearoldman wrote: post #56
linuxftw wrote: post #32

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

Yes. Let’s do this thing that will likely lower pay and ensure shitty engineers keep jobs they can’t do because of a horribly short sighted view that RTO is not equitable. The issues with Unions is there appears to be no way for a company to hire non union workers. Once this happens you are basically the mob. And hold the company and other employees hostage to mob rule. Which is almost always not driven by logic. The…

A CBA can cover things other than wages. Many states are also right to work, so nobody has to join the union in those states.

How long do you think Amazon will last as a company if their engineering department went on strike? Probably about 15 minutes. Amazon workers could really get a fair slice of the pie of they organized.

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

#68

Post by jmclnx »

zer8k wrote: post #37
jmclnx wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

But unemployment insurance does, the next door red state has far worse unemployment and social support laws that where I live. They get 1/3 per month then were I am.

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

#69

Post by zarathustreal »

40yearoldman wrote: post #56
linuxftw wrote: post #32

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

Yes. Let’s do this thing that will likely lower pay and ensure shitty engineers keep jobs they can’t do because of a horribly short sighted view that RTO is not equitable. The issues with Unions is there appears to be no way for a company to hire non union workers. Once this happens you are basically the mob. And hold the company and other employees hostage to mob rule. Which is almost always not driven by logic. The…

What exactly is insane about wanting a software engineering job to allow you to work remotely? Obviously it’s entirely possible to do remotely, I’m curious what I’m missing that makes this insane?
Post reply on HN