3 ms·
I think words sometimes lose their meaning in some places. Clearly, OP doesn't even understand that "voluntarily" doing something means that you only do it if y
by brabel 4y ago
I think words sometimes lose their meaning in some places. Clearly, OP doesn't even understand that "voluntarily" doing something means that you only do it if you want to... so refusing to do it is by definition within your rights... what they seem to be trying to do is re-defining what voluntary means... unfortunately, a very common tactic these days.
- fencepost 4y agoIn this case it seems that 'voluntary' means 'we need some people but we're leaving it up to you which specific people take those shifts.' That doesn't seem unreasonable.
- sudhirj 4y agoWorkers intentionally choosing to disrupt a volunteer-based shift in a coordinated way is in no way the same thing as deciding not to volunteer for something.
- lozenge 4y agoIt is a decision, you just don't approve of their reasoning.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- denton-scratch 4y agoAccording to the report, the agreement says that overtime isn't voluntary if there are too few volunteers to do the work. Definitions of "voluntary" are beside the point. Also, the report says part of the employer's complaint is that there was no vote taken on the action. The implication is that had the action been official, i.e. called by the union following a vote, then the threatening letter would not have been sent. It looks to me like the employer's letter was inadvisable, and perhaps should have been reviewed by the company's PR team before it went out.