7 ms·

90 days is the number agreed upon by company lawyers. Company lawyers do not have a sense of adventure, so this is a relatively watertight figure for most count

90 days is the number agreed upon by company lawyers. Company lawyers do not have a sense of adventure, so this is a relatively watertight figure for most countries in the world and not dependent on your honesty.

ericmay 4y ago
I'm not sure when this 90-day rule was written, but I imagine it was written in a time before now with high-performance laptops, video conferencing, common jet travel, and people wanting to work 30 days here, 90 days there, 120 days over there, etc. This should be revisited. Also I think this is a good example of the need to have expiration dates on new laws and regulations. This should be something that expires and has to be changed to reflect how people live today.
- JusticeJuice 4y ago
  90 days is the standard tourist visa length for most countries, so it would be to match that.
  - ericmay 4y ago
    No need to match
    - rat9988 4y ago
      It needs to matchs.Otherwise you'd need a work visa.
      - kieloo 4y ago
        But isn’t it illegal to work on a tourist visa anyway?
        Retric 4y ago
        Most countries have many exceptions. A UK “tourist visa” is called a “Standard Visitor visa.” https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1019544/Visit.pdf#page31 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/... Remote working Visitors are permitted to undertake activities relating to their employment overseas remotely whilst they are in the UK, such as responding to emails or answering phone calls. However, you should check that the applicant’s main purpose of coming to the UK is to undertake a permitted activity, rather than specifically to work remotely from the UK. Where the applicant indicates that they intend to spend a large proportion of their time in the UK and will be doing some remote working, you should ensure that they are genuinely employed overseas and are not seeking to work in the UK. PS: Actual rules are here: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/immigration-rules https://www.gov.uk/guidance/immigration-rules but the general intent seems to be if your there to do something very temporary like compete in a sports tournament or do something for someone outside the UK that requires you to briefly visit the UK it’s fine.
        refurb 4y ago
        "the applicant’s main purpose of coming to the UK is to undertake a permitted activity, rather than specifically to work remotely from the UK" That's doesn't seem like an exception? That sounds like saying "hey, I'm going to fly to the UK and work remotely from there" is against the law. What that paragraph says to me is "If someone comes to the UK as a visitor, and happens to do some work - responding to email and/or answering phone calls" that's ok. But actually work full time in the UK remotely, is not legal.
        tluyben2 4y ago
        I believe this is the case in many countries; you can do some work like signing contracts and indeed answering emails and the phone for work purposes, but you cannot just take out the ol' laptop and write code for 90 days. Many people do because you cannot really check but it's not allowed, at least not in places I have been. Especially if you keep travelling (so 2-3 months here, 2-3 months there) then there is very little point in doing all this trouble unless you cannot stand technically doing something illegal although no-one will find out. Anecdotal example; when I was young and naive (well, more naive than now), I went to Canada (Vancouver) to help some guys out with some software. I read up on it a bit, but not enough (naive!) so at the border I told that I was going to do a bit of sight seeing and a bit of 'work'. Wrong word; was immediately taken apart and spent 1 hour explaining that no, no not work, just a bit of light consultancy; no programming, no actual managing people etc and no money changing hands (this was all true, I just shouldn't have used the word 'work'). They let me enter and there were no further issues, but I guess most people would just say 'vacation!' even though this was allowed; it can/does add stress and you might be unlucky and be sent back.
- MikeTheGreat 4y ago
  > the need to have expiration dates on new laws and regulations. This is a terrible idea. Here in the US the ever more hyper-partisan political environment makes it hard to do _anything_, even once. The idea that our Congress critters are going to re-pass all legislation for everything every (say) 5 years is ridiculous. Those of us who like knowing that our food is safe to eat, our cars aren't firebomb death traps waiting to explode, that planes won't fall out of the sky onto our houses that aren't going to spontaneously collapse / flood from shitty plumbing / burn down from an electrical fire will disagree that all legislation should be repealed (either directly or via repeal-by-expiration), but please - let's be honest about what the effects of an 'expiration date' on legislation would actually accomplish.
  - tdy_err 4y ago
    Maybe this is an indicator that we need a legal infrastructure that supports a progressive, scientific governance Rather than thumbing our noses at new approaches on behalf of defunct political parties
dheera 4y ago
Personally I'm curious about how they have rights to even know where you are at any given time. If you're an in-office employee, your responsibilities are (a) show up at the expected work hours (b) get your tasks done. If you're defined as a fully remote employee, your responsibilities are (a) be online and available at the expected work hours (b) get your tasks done. Besides that you're just an amorphous black box, a person that has been placed in the cloud, much like a website placed on Cloudflare, where the input is money and the output is work. They don't need to know where you are, and I'd say they shouldn't even have a right to know -- that would be quite stalkerish, IMO. All that's really important is that this black box gets tasks done.
- schrodinger 4y ago
  You can't just legally avoid taxes by not letting your employer know. Sure, they prob won't know and you'll get away with it, but you're technically breaking the law and an employer won't knowingly condone that. So it's not that they have a right to know where you are, it's that if they do notice and not act on it that's a legal risk to them as well since they're enabling it. (IANAL but this feels common sense.)
  - dheera 4y ago
    I wasn't saying avoid taxes -- mostly just that the "90 day" thing is nonsense, because if you're a remote employee, you're effectively just a really intelligent amoeba on the face of the Earth without a well-defined location. Pay your taxes, but if you say 153 days in Thailand or wherever you can get a long enough tourist visa, and use a VPN to the US and get your work done, I'm not sure why anyone would, should, or even has a right to care.
    - schrodinger 4y ago
      Thailand has a right to care. You're earning money and not paying taxes to their roads, police, fire department, etc—all the things govt provides. When you're a true tourist, you are likely making up for this by boosting the local economy.

ericmay 4y ago

I'm not sure when this 90-day rule was written, but I imagine it was written in a time before now with high-performance laptops, video conferencing, common jet travel, and people wanting to work 30 days here, 90 days there, 120 days over there, etc. This should be revisited. Also I think this is a good example of the need to have expiration dates on new laws and regulations. This should be something that expires and has to be changed to reflect how people live today.

JusticeJuice 4y ago
90 days is the standard tourist visa length for most countries, so it would be to match that.
- ericmay 4y ago
  No need to match
  - rat9988 4y ago
    It needs to matchs.Otherwise you'd need a work visa.
    - kieloo 4y ago
      But isn’t it illegal to work on a tourist visa anyway?
      - Retric 4y ago
        Most countries have many exceptions. A UK “tourist visa” is called a “Standard Visitor visa.” https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1019544/Visit.pdf#page31 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/... Remote working Visitors are permitted to undertake activities relating to their employment overseas remotely whilst they are in the UK, such as responding to emails or answering phone calls. However, you should check that the applicant’s main purpose of coming to the UK is to undertake a permitted activity, rather than specifically to work remotely from the UK. Where the applicant indicates that they intend to spend a large proportion of their time in the UK and will be doing some remote working, you should ensure that they are genuinely employed overseas and are not seeking to work in the UK. PS: Actual rules are here: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/immigration-rules https://www.gov.uk/guidance/immigration-rules but the general intent seems to be if your there to do something very temporary like compete in a sports tournament or do something for someone outside the UK that requires you to briefly visit the UK it’s fine.
        refurb 4y ago
        "the applicant’s main purpose of coming to the UK is to undertake a permitted activity, rather than specifically to work remotely from the UK" That's doesn't seem like an exception? That sounds like saying "hey, I'm going to fly to the UK and work remotely from there" is against the law. What that paragraph says to me is "If someone comes to the UK as a visitor, and happens to do some work - responding to email and/or answering phone calls" that's ok. But actually work full time in the UK remotely, is not legal.
        tluyben2 4y ago
        I believe this is the case in many countries; you can do some work like signing contracts and indeed answering emails and the phone for work purposes, but you cannot just take out the ol' laptop and write code for 90 days. Many people do because you cannot really check but it's not allowed, at least not in places I have been. Especially if you keep travelling (so 2-3 months here, 2-3 months there) then there is very little point in doing all this trouble unless you cannot stand technically doing something illegal although no-one will find out. Anecdotal example; when I was young and naive (well, more naive than now), I went to Canada (Vancouver) to help some guys out with some software. I read up on it a bit, but not enough (naive!) so at the border I told that I was going to do a bit of sight seeing and a bit of 'work'. Wrong word; was immediately taken apart and spent 1 hour explaining that no, no not work, just a bit of light consultancy; no programming, no actual managing people etc and no money changing hands (this was all true, I just shouldn't have used the word 'work'). They let me enter and there were no further issues, but I guess most people would just say 'vacation!' even though this was allowed; it can/does add stress and you might be unlucky and be sent back.
MikeTheGreat 4y ago
> the need to have expiration dates on new laws and regulations. This is a terrible idea. Here in the US the ever more hyper-partisan political environment makes it hard to do _anything_, even once. The idea that our Congress critters are going to re-pass all legislation for everything every (say) 5 years is ridiculous. Those of us who like knowing that our food is safe to eat, our cars aren't firebomb death traps waiting to explode, that planes won't fall out of the sky onto our houses that aren't going to spontaneously collapse / flood from shitty plumbing / burn down from an electrical fire will disagree that all legislation should be repealed (either directly or via repeal-by-expiration), but please - let's be honest about what the effects of an 'expiration date' on legislation would actually accomplish.
- tdy_err 4y ago
  Maybe this is an indicator that we need a legal infrastructure that supports a progressive, scientific governance Rather than thumbing our noses at new approaches on behalf of defunct political parties

dheera 4y ago

Personally I'm curious about how they have rights to even know where you are at any given time. If you're an in-office employee, your responsibilities are (a) show up at the expected work hours (b) get your tasks done. If you're defined as a fully remote employee, your responsibilities are (a) be online and available at the expected work hours (b) get your tasks done. Besides that you're just an amorphous black box, a person that has been placed in the cloud, much like a website placed on Cloudflare, where the input is money and the output is work. They don't need to know where you are, and I'd say they shouldn't even have a right to know -- that would be quite stalkerish, IMO. All that's really important is that this black box gets tasks done.

schrodinger 4y ago
You can't just legally avoid taxes by not letting your employer know. Sure, they prob won't know and you'll get away with it, but you're technically breaking the law and an employer won't knowingly condone that. So it's not that they have a right to know where you are, it's that if they do notice and not act on it that's a legal risk to them as well since they're enabling it. (IANAL but this feels common sense.)
- dheera 4y ago
  I wasn't saying avoid taxes -- mostly just that the "90 day" thing is nonsense, because if you're a remote employee, you're effectively just a really intelligent amoeba on the face of the Earth without a well-defined location. Pay your taxes, but if you say 153 days in Thailand or wherever you can get a long enough tourist visa, and use a VPN to the US and get your work done, I'm not sure why anyone would, should, or even has a right to care.
  - schrodinger 4y ago
    Thailand has a right to care. You're earning money and not paying taxes to their roads, police, fire department, etc—all the things govt provides. When you're a true tourist, you are likely making up for this by boosting the local economy.