4 ms·
> I don't think it'd be too much of a stretch to also suggest that it'd be bad if all employers decided that their workers had to be butts-in-seats 40 hours (or
by tablespoonsruby 5y ago
> I don't think it'd be too much of a stretch to also suggest that it'd be bad if all employers decided that their workers had to be butts-in-seats 40 hours (or more) per week, no exceptions.
Well, yes. That's not happening, though. My point is that I see people essentially claiming that it's immoral for any companies to not permit remote work, and I disagree with that.
- tolbish 5y agoWhat is the difference between mandated butts in seats for 40 hours and not permitting remote work?
- tablespoonsruby 5y agoNothing. There's a difference between all employers forbidding remote work, and only some of them doing so.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]