4 ms·

The in-office requirement seems like clearly constructive dismissal given this: "2-day a week office requirement = 20% voluntary departures" "Day-0...sharpen y

• gnicholas 4y ago
  I don't think that's how constructive dismissal works (I am a former lawyer, but not an employment law specialist). I believe it is based on objective factors, not subjective intent or awareness of the likely outcome. If an employer says "you have to come back into the office 2x weekly" that is different from "you have to commute to our new office, located 60 miles away". The latter would be constructive dismissal because it is new, unexpected, and a material challenge for many employees. Ditto if they removed half the bathrooms, didn't provide enough office space for the workers, cut the parking lot in half, etc. But asking employees to resume doing something that they were willing to do when they first joined the company (assuming they joined pre-pandemic) would be difficult to characterize as constructive dismissal.
  • cma 4y ago
    > But asking employees to resume doing something that they were willing to do when they first joined the company (assuming they joined pre-pandemic) would be difficult to characterize as constructive dismissal. They encouraged people to move far away from the office, where ever they wanted, and then are doing this explicitly for the attrition side-effect, not because they need the people in the office.
    • gnicholas 4y ago
      Ah, I wasn't aware of that. So they said that people could be remote forever? Was this a company-wide policy, or just certain teams?
      • spoils19 4y ago
        Company-wide. Here's a reference that took less than thirty seconds to find: https://twitter.com/paraga/status/1499422876134371329 https://twitter.com/paraga/status/1499422876134371329