4 ms·

Amazon is doing this. I went through the process and the recruiter tried to manipulate me into "assigning a local office" otherwise it has to go through "an app

Amazon is doing this. I went through the process and the recruiter tried to manipulate me into "assigning a local office" otherwise it has to go through "an approval process". I told him put it through the approval then or I walk. He also tried car-salesman tactics of trying to get me to accept a lower total comp package. I stood firmly at the top of my range and after days of trying to convince me otherwise, they finally caved. They're also holding back-to-the-office meetings where they want local individuals to come in a few times a week and remote individuals to come in on a somewhat regular frequency (e.g. once a month). I told them to shove it, I'm not coming in, ever. I don't need their money that badly. I'd rather slash my salary in half and work somewhere that's not trying to screw me over at every turn. I think after 3-6 months I'm quitting anyway. EDIT: I should mention I just started at the company and it's already pissing me off. Thankfully my old cushy job will take me back any time.

picardo 5y ago
Being assigned an office doesn't mean that it's not remote. It entirely depends on the team. I worked for a team that wanted me in office for three days a week last year. My current team is entirely remote, but I'm still assigned to an office that I can go to anytime I want, which is totally optional.
- AlotOfReading 5y ago
  On the other hand, I had exactly this sort of issue with Amazon subsidiary Zoox a couple months ago. We had verbally agreed on terms that would have me doing primarily remote work. When they finally sent me terms, they specified full time in-office and changed a few other things like salary. The excuse was that some higher-up wouldn't approve remote right now, but they were trying to convince them.
- y-c-o-m-b 5y ago
  No, but here's the catch that I learned about: if you're assigned to an office, they can make you go into that office at the same frequency as in-office workers. You'd basically have nothing in writing that states you're a remote employee (I specifically asked the recruiter about this, and he confirmed). Otherwise why would being fully remote need "special approval"? That doesn't make any sense.
bin_bash 5y ago
> I'm not coming in, ever. In my experience working remote for the past decade "remote" usually involves coming to the office or having an offsite once a quarter. I don't think that's unreasonable at all.
- y-c-o-m-b 5y ago
  I've been doing remote longer than a decade and never ever had to come in to the office when designated as such. Might be reasonable for you, but that's up to the individual and at the very least needs to be disclosed in the interview stage if it's mandated. Some people work remote because they have debilitating anxiety, phobias, or mental health issues. Others are single parents that don't have the ability to offload those responsibilities. There are valid reasons for never going in.
  - mvdwoord 5y ago
    I respectfully disagree. Traveling to the office or for an offsite once a quarter is totally reasonable and when planned some three weeks ahead or so, should pose no issues whatsoever. If you are unable to fit this in your schedule, or are actually that mentally unfit you cannot oblige your fellow humans in your job... Every once in a while? Then you should not have that job. This should be considered reasonable by any standard. Not wanting to deal with humans most of the time... Fine. Not being able to deal with your human colleagues, who do want to deal with each other, ever? Not fine. $0.02
    - hiq 5y ago
      I don't get the absolutes here, this can easily be discussed during interviews and before signing anything. Either the company and the future employee agree on what's reasonable and they sign, or they don't, and that's it.
    - y-c-o-m-b 5y ago
      You can disagree all you want, but at the end of the day it's still only your opinion and is unrealistic. For full disclosure, I have a neurological disease with physical ailments, I have digestive medical problems which would make it embarrassing for me and very uncomfortable for them, and I have a personality disorder which includes anxiety and depression as a bonus. All of which makes onsite participation literally torture for just a few hours, let alone a whole week of it. Clearly I've done my job so effectively for so long that I can work anywhere in tech and demand top salaries, so your comment about "not having that job" is not only extremely lacking in empathy, but downright wrong. EDIT: just to clarify, this is only relevant for employers that do not disclose the requirement during the hiring phase. If they disclose it ahead of time, then I might agree with you.
copperx 5y ago
What led you to go from a cushy job to a sweatshop, if I may ask?
- y-c-o-m-b 5y ago
  Sure thing. Going in I knew I would hate working at a FAANG, so there were a few factors really: 1) my old job loves what I do and I can easily return at any time, 2) I literally doubled my salary, 3) polish up my experience, and 4) it would bullet-proof my resume. On that last point: I haven't had issues getting in the door anywhere for the last decade, but I think if the industry were to sour, it would help my resume stand out from other candidates.
datavirtue 5y ago
GE burnt me out within six months doing the same crap. In my case I was coming in as a contractor for six months (and then on to FTE) and the original contract mentioned "travel" which I had them remove and they told me no travel ever...not a big deal. Whole story changed when it came to hiring on as an FTE. Occasional travel was required and no guarantees on getting hired with some wired interview process that they actually took seriously. Total bait and switch trash. I went through with it because I had already left my previous job fucking six months earlier. I hired in at, as I come to find out, some illustrious Senior Staff level that is nearly impossible to achieve for people starting thier career there. I was soon meeting people who had been kissing ass for a decade who were getting denied senior level. I spent the next six months telegraphing my lack of enthusiasm for the company and was laid off when the pandemic set in. People were offering me other jobs etc but I refused and took the package...which was very nice at my level. I had just been paid full bonus and I received a bonus the following year for time I spent with the company on the next bonus cycle. A year after being laid off another $5k drops in my account. These people are batshit.

picardo 5y ago

Being assigned an office doesn't mean that it's not remote. It entirely depends on the team. I worked for a team that wanted me in office for three days a week last year. My current team is entirely remote, but I'm still assigned to an office that I can go to anytime I want, which is totally optional.

AlotOfReading 5y ago
On the other hand, I had exactly this sort of issue with Amazon subsidiary Zoox a couple months ago. We had verbally agreed on terms that would have me doing primarily remote work. When they finally sent me terms, they specified full time in-office and changed a few other things like salary. The excuse was that some higher-up wouldn't approve remote right now, but they were trying to convince them.
y-c-o-m-b 5y ago
No, but here's the catch that I learned about: if you're assigned to an office, they can make you go into that office at the same frequency as in-office workers. You'd basically have nothing in writing that states you're a remote employee (I specifically asked the recruiter about this, and he confirmed). Otherwise why would being fully remote need "special approval"? That doesn't make any sense.

bin_bash 5y ago

> I'm not coming in, ever. In my experience working remote for the past decade "remote" usually involves coming to the office or having an offsite once a quarter. I don't think that's unreasonable at all.

y-c-o-m-b 5y ago
I've been doing remote longer than a decade and never ever had to come in to the office when designated as such. Might be reasonable for you, but that's up to the individual and at the very least needs to be disclosed in the interview stage if it's mandated. Some people work remote because they have debilitating anxiety, phobias, or mental health issues. Others are single parents that don't have the ability to offload those responsibilities. There are valid reasons for never going in.
- mvdwoord 5y ago
  I respectfully disagree. Traveling to the office or for an offsite once a quarter is totally reasonable and when planned some three weeks ahead or so, should pose no issues whatsoever. If you are unable to fit this in your schedule, or are actually that mentally unfit you cannot oblige your fellow humans in your job... Every once in a while? Then you should not have that job. This should be considered reasonable by any standard. Not wanting to deal with humans most of the time... Fine. Not being able to deal with your human colleagues, who do want to deal with each other, ever? Not fine. $0.02
  - hiq 5y ago
    I don't get the absolutes here, this can easily be discussed during interviews and before signing anything. Either the company and the future employee agree on what's reasonable and they sign, or they don't, and that's it.
  - y-c-o-m-b 5y ago
    You can disagree all you want, but at the end of the day it's still only your opinion and is unrealistic. For full disclosure, I have a neurological disease with physical ailments, I have digestive medical problems which would make it embarrassing for me and very uncomfortable for them, and I have a personality disorder which includes anxiety and depression as a bonus. All of which makes onsite participation literally torture for just a few hours, let alone a whole week of it. Clearly I've done my job so effectively for so long that I can work anywhere in tech and demand top salaries, so your comment about "not having that job" is not only extremely lacking in empathy, but downright wrong. EDIT: just to clarify, this is only relevant for employers that do not disclose the requirement during the hiring phase. If they disclose it ahead of time, then I might agree with you.

copperx 5y ago

What led you to go from a cushy job to a sweatshop, if I may ask?

y-c-o-m-b 5y ago
Sure thing. Going in I knew I would hate working at a FAANG, so there were a few factors really: 1) my old job loves what I do and I can easily return at any time, 2) I literally doubled my salary, 3) polish up my experience, and 4) it would bullet-proof my resume. On that last point: I haven't had issues getting in the door anywhere for the last decade, but I think if the industry were to sour, it would help my resume stand out from other candidates.

datavirtue 5y ago

GE burnt me out within six months doing the same crap. In my case I was coming in as a contractor for six months (and then on to FTE) and the original contract mentioned "travel" which I had them remove and they told me no travel ever...not a big deal. Whole story changed when it came to hiring on as an FTE. Occasional travel was required and no guarantees on getting hired with some wired interview process that they actually took seriously. Total bait and switch trash. I went through with it because I had already left my previous job fucking six months earlier. I hired in at, as I come to find out, some illustrious Senior Staff level that is nearly impossible to achieve for people starting thier career there. I was soon meeting people who had been kissing ass for a decade who were getting denied senior level. I spent the next six months telegraphing my lack of enthusiasm for the company and was laid off when the pandemic set in. People were offering me other jobs etc but I refused and took the package...which was very nice at my level. I had just been paid full bonus and I received a bonus the following year for time I spent with the company on the next bonus cycle. A year after being laid off another $5k drops in my account. These people are batshit.