31–40 of 61 posts
It's unclear from the article, but it seems like these people were hired near an office, (stupidly) moved away during covid, and now don't want to return. I have sympathy for them, but also it seems stupid to have thought remote work would last longer than covid.
What's the difference between resign and layoff :)
Resign is employee initiated, being laid off, or layoff, is company initiated. Not sure about other states, but in Illinois if you resign, most likely you won't qualify for unemployment benefits. If you're laid off (as I've been multiple times), you can qualify for unemployment benefits. I'm basing this on my experience, but you should consult an attorney before signing anything if you're being fired/laid off/let go,…
The following is not legal advice, it's just my opinion. DYOR, check with a lawyer, etc. "Do you want to relocate or resign?" is a false dichotomy. You can always just refuse to answer (possibly with soft words like ""I'm not sure" or "I haven't decided yet") -- keep doing your job, and wait until the company lets you go. I'm pretty sure, if a company moves its operations and your job no longer exists in the same loc…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_dismissal#United_...
Why do these companies keep trying to fire remote employees? Is it so hard to let them keep working from home? Is the company's real estate portfolio that important? You could probably even pay remote workers less (or give non-remote employees a "bonus" for coming in) and everyone would still be happy.
Older than this is the "open office" thing. We saw over time how this wasn't about collaboration or even space-saving, but about keeping employees under watch.
Why do these companies keep trying to fire remote employees? Is it so hard to let them keep working from home? Is the company's real estate portfolio that important? You could probably even pay remote workers less (or give non-remote employees a "bonus" for coming in) and everyone would still be happy.
Look at it from the companies' point of view: - Human contact is more important than efficiency gains, hence mandating return-to-office. - At the same time, efficiency gains are more important than human contact, hence reducing human headcount in favor of increased AI use. If you read between the lines, you can see how those two points are related: humans find difficult to feel connected when their communication part…
First, citation needed. Second, in this day and age companies try whatever they can to ruin in-office employees' morale as well, which goes counter to the position that social quality of life is important for efficiency.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm also not a lawyer, but wouldn't getting fired for not showing up to work be for-cause, thus excluding you from unemployment benefits? My understanding (which isn't clarified in the article) is these employees weren't hired to be remove, they were hired at an office.
Changing working location could be a contract change, and (at least in the netherlands), employees cant be forced to accept contract changes or resign.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look at it from the companies' point of view: - Human contact is more important than efficiency gains, hence mandating return-to-office. - At the same time, efficiency gains are more important than human contact, hence reducing human headcount in favor of increased AI use. If you read between the lines, you can see how those two points are related: humans find difficult to feel connected when their communication part…
> Human contact is more important than efficiency gains, hence mandating return-to-office. First, citation needed. Second, in this day and age companies try whatever they can to ruin in-office employees' morale as well, which goes counter to the position that social quality of life is important for efficiency.
As I’ve written in the past, companies that tolerate or even encourage WFH will have advantages when it comes to hiring (or retaining) older workers or workers with professional partners. If young bodies are what’s desired, yeah, do the cattle call. If skill and experience matters or there’s any talent availability issues they’re limiting their hiring pool.
Why do these companies keep trying to fire remote employees? Is it so hard to let them keep working from home? Is the company's real estate portfolio that important? You could probably even pay remote workers less (or give non-remote employees a "bonus" for coming in) and everyone would still be happy.
1) Companies are reducing salaries when they hire new workers.
2) Companies are not having problems finding in person employees.
I'm going to have a surprised pikachu face when the market flips and everyone resigns from these companies.
Why do these companies keep trying to fire remote employees? Is it so hard to let them keep working from home? Is the company's real estate portfolio that important? You could probably even pay remote workers less (or give non-remote employees a "bonus" for coming in) and everyone would still be happy.
Too many issues with remote employees disappearing to do other stuff during the day. Amazon and others are requiring employees to go to any office, not necessarily the one with their teammates, so it's evidently not about in-person collaboration. My manager (different company) told me straight up, the dept is ok with me working remote but not other people. Older than this is the "open office" thing. We saw over time…
Are the managers competent? Do they know how to evaluate if work/goals are being met without counting how many hours the employee is online?