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

71–80 of 106 posts

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

#71

Post by linuxftw »

sidlls wrote: post #31
o1y32 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ju…

Organize your local political machine to declare each flu season an emergency, and enforce lock downs again.

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

#72

Post by grayhatter »

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".

rule #2 of hacker news, never express an opinion different from the hive mind.

I don't agree with the other commenters, that you're suffering from Stockholm. So I'm sorry your opinion is getting unfairly trashed the way it is.

But like you're not wrong to enjoy working in the office, they're not wrong for wanting to work at home. And it's pretty clear Amazon is being abusive with their policies

So not everyone is a victim sure, some of them are, and I think the expectation is that everyone will help stand up against the bully, even when the bully isn't targeting you.

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

#73

Post by tptacek »

RollAHardSix wrote: post #54
tptacek wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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…

Virtually everybody lives in an at-will state. The definition of an at-will state is one in which your employer doesn't need any reason to fire you. How does the constructive dismissal claim work? Is it your belief that they could fire you immediately if they wanted to, but have somehow, despite the huge legal department, blundered into the one way they can't fire you?

If this is just about unemployment benefits, sure: but you're eligible for unemployment benefits when you're RIF'd, too. You don't have to be constructively terminated to be eligible, just not fired for cause --- which is what termination in the ordinary course is.

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

#74

Post by s1artibartfast »

RollAHardSix wrote: post #65
s1artibartfast wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Thats a fair point if the employee thinks they will be using it.

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

#76

Post by pjc50 »

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.

Please cite any "lecture" from any Amazon executive on the subject of climate change.

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

#77

Post by tptacek »

RollAHardSix wrote: post #65
s1artibartfast wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Why would there be legal arbitration? They already have the right to terminate you without cause. At best, wouldn't you be "winning" the recognition that they're simply RIF'ing you?

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

#78

Post by unpwn »

andsoitis wrote: post #33
tedajax wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 employmen…

Employment relationships and tradeoffs are negotiated at the time of hiring. Abruptly changing the terms in the middle with no re-negotiation is unfair. Sure, employees are free to leave and find another job, but with a layoff an employee has many benefits such as severance that are offered, where as in this case there are none. Instead of laying off people, should Amazon be able to just reduce their salary to 0, then say they're free to resign if they're not happy with it?

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

#80

Post by taeric »

tptacek wrote: post #73
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…

Virtually everybody lives in an at-will state. The definition of an at-will state is one in which your employer doesn't need any reason to fire you. How does the constructive dismissal claim work? Is it your belief that they could fire you immediately if they wanted to, but have somehow, despite the huge legal department, blundered into the one way they can't fire you? If this is just about unemployment benefits, sur…

My understanding is you can't get unemployment for quitting, though? Is that not accurate?
Post reply on HN