4 ms·
Interestingly, the situation where labor can't move as freely as capital might not hold in the case of remote work which is why working from home is, or should
by zcw100 6y ago
Interestingly, the situation where labor can't move as freely as capital might not hold in the case of remote work which is why working from home is, or should be, scaring the hell out of some people.
If it doesn't let me paint a picture. CEO comes in and checks their email. There's an email from his development team lead. "Dear CEO, The team and I had a discussion and and we no longer have confidence in your ability to usher this project to a successful outcome and have decided to work for company X in country Y. We have ceased development for your project at 8:17am and will be working for X as of 8:18am.
- dundarious 6y agoEven so, that will be an option for a minority of workers.
- s1artibartfast 6y agoIsn't the inverse true as well? While this could have some downside re compensation, I look forward to employers smoothing the on/off-boarding process. Nothing is more frustrating than engaging with incompetent coworkers who are only around because it is too hard to find a replacement.
- matthewmcg 6y agoThis is true, but I imagine your scenario might be followed by threats from the CEO to X about noncompete clauses, confidential information, and theft of the company’s IP. On the whole, these legal protections strongly advantage capital vs. labor, though California residents might benefit from their state’s hostility to non-compete clauses.
- jk700 6y ago> This is true, but I imagine your scenario might be followed by threats from the CEO to X about noncompete clauses, confidential information, and theft of the company’s IP. Those are empty threats if the team is not from the CEO's litigious country.