5 ms·
The OP seems to only source its claims to the Daily Mail[0], which itself does not contain any new claims except for this: > The need to request formal permiss
by AndrewGaspar 5y ago
The OP seems to only source its claims to the Daily Mail[0], which itself does not contain any new claims except for this:
> The need to request formal permission also applies to employees offered pay cuts in return for staying at home in cases where the local cost of living is lower than around the office where they are usually based.
To start, this claim is unsourced.
I'm having a hard time interpreting this claim, but it seems like _maybe_ it's saying that FB is requesting individuals who were already approved for remote work to RTO. But it also seems like they're just describing the existing process, which is that if you want to remain remote beyond January 2022, you must be explicitly approved for remote work. Anyway, I can't speak for everyone, but as a remote approved FB employee, I've received no such request to RTO.
[0] https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10064865/Facebook-gives-staff-three-month-deadline-desks.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10064865/Facebook-g...
- midasuni 5y agoDaily Mail and most of the U.K. press and government has spent a lot of effort demonising remote working. The same people who own interest in commercial real estate and companies like Starbucks. No idea why they would be so concerned with pushing their agenda.
- ashtonkem 5y agoThe coordinated push against WFH has been something to behold. They’re not even being subtle about it.
- tylerhou 5y ago> Anyway, I can't speak for everyone, but as a remote approved FB employee, I've received no such request to RTO. Then I'm more inclined to believe you. (Hence my initial wording "this policy may have changed.")