• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      711 year ago

      And if they resign, no severance.

      Pretty sure Tesla is getting sued right now because they tried to call layoffs resignations with this same scheme

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          101 year ago

          I think you’re misunderstanding the cause and effect here.

          “They did something wrong which is why they’re getting sued” is not the same thing as “they are getting sued, therefore they must have done something wrong.”

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -51 year ago

            I’m just stating a fact. You can sue someone for anything, it doesn’t mean you’ll win. Just because someone sues you it doesn’t mean you actually did anything wrong.

            I’m just saying that saying that Tesla is getting sued for doing the same thing doesn’t actually mean anything. It can be said that Tesla did the same thing, but the fact that they’re getting sued for it doesn’t really mean anything until they win or lose (and maybe a little if they settle) the lawsuit.

    • ThrowawayOnLemmy
      link
      fedilink
      451 year ago

      Can an employee just refuse to go back and continue to work? I’d much rather be fired by them than give them a pass by resigning.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        81 year ago

        Yes, but they don’t have to pay you unemployment, because they can say you’re not following employment requirements.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          361 year ago

          they can’t change your job in order to get you to quit, though. You don’t have to agree to new requirements, and can get unemployment because they fire you for not doing so.

          In this case, this might still qualify as constructive dismissal. Even if it for sure would, not everyone will apply for unemployment, and they can still challenge it, causing delays and getting more people to not pursue it, ultimately resulting in a layoff that’s cheaper than it’s ought to be.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            51 year ago

            Yeah - I’m not a lawyer, but my casual understanding is you can get out of that gotcha if you apply the rule equally to everyone at the company. No legal action against these RTO mandates has been successful so far.

            That being said, I didn’t fully read the article. Roblox is offering severance to those who don’t want to RTO - that’s less shitty than a lot of the other tech companies.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      421 year ago

      If people were hired (say, in 2020) under the condition that they’re allowed to work from home, this might be considered constructive dismissal - that is, forcing an employee to quit in a way that is equivalent to firing them. The employees are then entitled to the normal rules for unemployment, and potentially severance pay, unused vacation cashout, and so on.

      I think Musk is facing several lawsuits along those lines, but might be moving to settle because the cost of arbitration would potentially bankrupt the company.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        -111 year ago

        Constructive dismissal only applies when it is used to terminate someone who is otherwise protected, for example a whistleblower. Companies can change work location requirements more or less at will.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          171 year ago

          Constructive dismissal was advised as a suit by an employment lawyer representing Twitter employees in California in a published article when Musk ordered employees whose employment offers specified work from home needed to work in the office. It’s a hostile change to the work environment that is alleged to encourage employees to quit, as indicated by the messages saying that people who do not return to office will be considered to have quit.

          I mean, you’re not necessarily wrong, and I’m sure Elon hopes you’re right. But we will have to see how it plays out. The fun part is that CA law specifies that some types of employee cases have to be tried individually rather than collectively.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      111 year ago

      They are actually not able to follow up. They are saying resign… not get canned. They actually cannot afford severance. Best way to fight back is not comply, not resign.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      41 year ago

      Constructive or insightful comments, such as this, are the kind of content Lemmy should strive for.

  • The Real King Gordon
    link
    fedilink
    741 year ago

    When will these asshole narcissist CEOs learn? We dont want to go into the office to stroke your fuckin ego, douchebag.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      181 year ago

      I blame all the managers who struggle to create remotely engaging virtual meetings, and who count the majority of their team’s productivity based on how many hours they can see them sitting at their desk🙄

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        81 year ago

        I do so much less work at the office than I do at home.

        Honestly, make me come back, I need a break.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      5
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      He’s one of the highest paid CEOs in the entire world, fun fact… the 7th highest paid, at USD$232,786,391 in 2021(which is 1600x the average roblox employee’s pay)

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    321 year ago

    Unspoken here is the third option: navigate a series of untextured raised rectangular platforms littered with smaller rectangles that will fire you automatically if you touch them, designed by an 8 year old that got bored halfway through the engineering phase and wandered off to play Breakin Story 2.

    The good news is that, for only 399 robux a month, you can get VIP membership, which includes a coil that allows you to immediately jump over the entire platform and land into a dated pile of two dimensional meme sprites they meant to clean up.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    30
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I was given an ultimatum like this once, to do X or resign, and I chose not to do X and refused to resign, and I worked there for an additional nine months until I found something better. I did have to endure several meetings where they kept saying I “needed” to resign or comply, but they never fired me. Said I would get a bad reference, but since that’s extremely risky on the company’s part, I still used them as a reference. HR dgaf. They just know they can’t say anything negative about a previous employee. The whole thing is absurd posturing.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      121 year ago

      Exactly. Fire me. I’ll work as an independent contractor and suck up your unemployment until I can’t get another dime, then I’ll get a job.

    • @souplook
      link
      English
      41 year ago

      why is it risky on their part?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        31 year ago

        Companies seem to be afraid of getting sued by the previous employee over it. I’m not sure what the claim would be though… Maybe defamation?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          3
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Defamation/slander/libel kind of thing with damages estimated based on anticipated earning potential over the course of time you might have been employed by the job they inhibited you from getting. That means that HR or whoever is called for the reference needs to be 100% accurate and provably correct about every single thing they say about the former employee.

          From a risk management viewpoint for the company there is basically no gain whatsoever for preventing an employee getting another job, it requires flawless execution, often from random people in HR, and the potential downside is the above, which could be million(s)-dollar damages.

          Basically: a bad referral is very high risk, minimal/no upside, and tremendous downside. HR simply reports demonstrable facts (whether employed at the company, from when to when), none of which is subject to interpretation.

          If you’ve REALLY pissed someone off in HR and they want to give you a bad reference, the most they might do is state yes they worked here from X to Y and ask the potential employer if they have other applicants, but even that is just pointless risk from the standpoint of the company.