3 ms·

You can look at it that way. Another way of looking at it is if my company (or the government) refuses to let me access my office, I should not be obligated to

by baddox 7y ago

You can look at it that way. Another way of looking at it is if my company (or the government) refuses to let me access my office, I should not be obligated to work. Do factory workers have to take home textiles and sew them from home? (I hope not, but I wouldn't be surprised if some places tried that.)

kjakm 7y ago
>> You can look at it that way. Another way of looking at it is if my company (or the government) refuses to let me access my office, I should not be obligated to work. In that case the company should not be obligated to pay you. There's a good chance your employment contract contains a clause allowing your place of work to change at any time (within a certain distance of where it is when you join).
- baddox 7y ago
  > In that case the company should not be obligated to pay you. Perhaps not, but in California the company is never obligated to pay you except for labor you've already done. > There's a good chance your employment contract contains a clause allowing your place of work to change at any time (within a certain distance of where it is when you join). In California, you don't have an employment contract period. Even if you did, I doubt the requirement to (for instance) maintain an Internet connection at your home so that you always have the ability to work from home would be an enforceable clause.
pmlnr 7y ago
You're looking at this the wrong way: factories used to have the power to mandate unpaid leave under extraordinary circumstances in the past, like state of emergency. Should something like that be declared, you don't get paid, or, if you're lucky, you get state paid sick leave, like most European countries, which is way lower, than your salary. In this case WFH really is for your benefit, for multiple reasons: staying away from people (eg not get infected that easily) and keep your salary be keep working.

by baddox 7y ago

kjakm 7y ago

>> You can look at it that way. Another way of looking at it is if my company (or the government) refuses to let me access my office, I should not be obligated to work. In that case the company should not be obligated to pay you. There's a good chance your employment contract contains a clause allowing your place of work to change at any time (within a certain distance of where it is when you join).

baddox 7y ago
> In that case the company should not be obligated to pay you. Perhaps not, but in California the company is never obligated to pay you except for labor you've already done. > There's a good chance your employment contract contains a clause allowing your place of work to change at any time (within a certain distance of where it is when you join). In California, you don't have an employment contract period. Even if you did, I doubt the requirement to (for instance) maintain an Internet connection at your home so that you always have the ability to work from home would be an enforceable clause.

pmlnr 7y ago

You're looking at this the wrong way: factories used to have the power to mandate unpaid leave under extraordinary circumstances in the past, like state of emergency. Should something like that be declared, you don't get paid, or, if you're lucky, you get state paid sick leave, like most European countries, which is way lower, than your salary. In this case WFH really is for your benefit, for multiple reasons: staying away from people (eg not get infected that easily) and keep your salary be keep working.