5 ms·

I think given at-will employment they can renege on that agreement whenever they want. Obviously it's best to have a meeting of minds, but can you really ever

I think given at-will employment they can renege on that agreement whenever they want. Obviously it's best to have a meeting of minds, but can you really ever trust a corporation? Probably not.

Aeolun 4y ago
They can terminate you instead of allowing you to work remote, but they cannot renege on the agreement to allow you to work remote.
- operatingthetan 4y ago
  I don't think those represent differing options. A corporation's power over workers takes the forms of adjusting comp or termination.
  - WalterBright 4y ago
    The worker's power over corporations is a willingness to say "no" and walk away. A person I know related that his employer said they were going to cut his salary. He said "do that and I quit". The cuts were rescinded.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - operatingthetan 4y ago
      Yeah nothing wrong with playing hardball, but if someone doesn't have retirement / 'f-you money' type savings then maybe they will be willing to take less risks.
      - WalterBright 4y ago
        If you have good job skills, it isn't much of a risk.
  - vineyardmike 4y ago
    > adjusting comp or termination. These usually have legal strings attached. The contract saying "it has to be remote" should restrict comp adjustment without negotiating. Termination may mean a severance, depending on the locality and laws and the contract.
- jrochkind1 4y ago
  Wait, what's the difference? "We will be terminating you instead of allowing you to work remote, but if you'd like to re-negotiate the terms to no longer be remote, then..."
  - ipaddr 4y ago
    They have to pay you out before rehiring if that is part of your agreement or your society has made laws that pay you a certain minimum
  - Aeolun 4y ago
    The difference is that they may be hesitant to fire you just because you work remote. If the terms aren’t in your contract the situation inverts, where the company can unilaterally change the terms and bet you’d be hesitant to leave.
- pessimizer 4y ago
  Which means that they can terminate you if you insist on working remotely, even after an agreement to allow you to work remotely.
  - Aeolun 4y ago
    Sure, but termination is a much larger step than unilaterally adjusting working conditions.
Mountain_Skies 4y ago
You might be able to include a compensation package requirement if they violate that part of the contract, but would have a difficult time forcing them to continue to employ you.
- operatingthetan 4y ago
  Right, if you can get them into a contract it's a poison pill for your employment to enforce it with lawyers. Perhaps the math works out, but given we are seeing a turning tide in the tech labor market, I'd say it would be difficult to attain a contract like that now.
nordsieck 4y ago
> I think given at-will employment they can renege on that agreement whenever they want. Obviously it's best to have a meeting of minds, but can you really ever trust a corporation? Probably not. Sure. But part of those precautions are so that you have a good story to tell your next company why you only worked somewhere for 4 months. Although I suppose it's not necessary to include such short jobs on your resume at all.
- bradlys 4y ago
  It's not really a problem in today's market, IMO. I've yet to have my string of short tenures ever really hold me back. The biggest issue is that you will have to regrind the leetcode gauntlet and go through a dozen more onsites to get that reasonable job offer again. That is the true pain.
  - sleepybrett 4y ago
    might be a problem now that 10s of thousands of ex faang are back on the market.
dragonwriter 4y ago
> I think given at-will employment they can renege on that agreement whenever they want. “at-will” employment refers to the laws setting the baseline conditions that apply absent a specific contract to the contrary. An offer and acceptance of employment on specific terms, if it meets the requirements for contract formatiom trumps the default terms unless it is blocked by something in the law. That’s why important employees (e.g., top execs, 9f nothing else) in most firms have specific contracts with terms that are not at-will employment (and why union contracts exist, too.)
nradov 4y ago
Depending on the exact facts of a particular case that would be considered constructive dismissal under the labor laws in most US states. Employers can terminate at-will employees at any time for any reason or no reason (with a few limited exceptions). But if an employer substantially changes the terms of your employment — like by forcing you to work in an office — and fires you for cause then you should still be able to obtain unemployment insurance. Of course, as a practical matter it's better to just avoid the whole mess if you have better options.
jrs235 4y ago
But if/when you decline to work in an office you'll have documentation making it much more difficult for them to try and deny an unemployment insurance claim if you put one in.

I think given at-will employment they can renege on that agreement whenever they want. Obviously it's best to have a meeting of minds, but can you really ever trust a corporation? Probably not.

Aeolun 4y ago

They can terminate you instead of allowing you to work remote, but they cannot renege on the agreement to allow you to work remote.

operatingthetan 4y ago
I don't think those represent differing options. A corporation's power over workers takes the forms of adjusting comp or termination.
- WalterBright 4y ago
  The worker's power over corporations is a willingness to say "no" and walk away. A person I know related that his employer said they were going to cut his salary. He said "do that and I quit". The cuts were rescinded.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - operatingthetan 4y ago
    Yeah nothing wrong with playing hardball, but if someone doesn't have retirement / 'f-you money' type savings then maybe they will be willing to take less risks.
    - WalterBright 4y ago
      If you have good job skills, it isn't much of a risk.
- vineyardmike 4y ago
  > adjusting comp or termination. These usually have legal strings attached. The contract saying "it has to be remote" should restrict comp adjustment without negotiating. Termination may mean a severance, depending on the locality and laws and the contract.
jrochkind1 4y ago
Wait, what's the difference? "We will be terminating you instead of allowing you to work remote, but if you'd like to re-negotiate the terms to no longer be remote, then..."
- ipaddr 4y ago
  They have to pay you out before rehiring if that is part of your agreement or your society has made laws that pay you a certain minimum
- Aeolun 4y ago
  The difference is that they may be hesitant to fire you just because you work remote. If the terms aren’t in your contract the situation inverts, where the company can unilaterally change the terms and bet you’d be hesitant to leave.
pessimizer 4y ago
Which means that they can terminate you if you insist on working remotely, even after an agreement to allow you to work remotely.
- Aeolun 4y ago
  Sure, but termination is a much larger step than unilaterally adjusting working conditions.

Mountain_Skies 4y ago

You might be able to include a compensation package requirement if they violate that part of the contract, but would have a difficult time forcing them to continue to employ you.

operatingthetan 4y ago
Right, if you can get them into a contract it's a poison pill for your employment to enforce it with lawyers. Perhaps the math works out, but given we are seeing a turning tide in the tech labor market, I'd say it would be difficult to attain a contract like that now.

nordsieck 4y ago

> I think given at-will employment they can renege on that agreement whenever they want. Obviously it's best to have a meeting of minds, but can you really ever trust a corporation? Probably not. Sure. But part of those precautions are so that you have a good story to tell your next company why you only worked somewhere for 4 months. Although I suppose it's not necessary to include such short jobs on your resume at all.

bradlys 4y ago
It's not really a problem in today's market, IMO. I've yet to have my string of short tenures ever really hold me back. The biggest issue is that you will have to regrind the leetcode gauntlet and go through a dozen more onsites to get that reasonable job offer again. That is the true pain.
- sleepybrett 4y ago
  might be a problem now that 10s of thousands of ex faang are back on the market.

dragonwriter 4y ago

> I think given at-will employment they can renege on that agreement whenever they want. “at-will” employment refers to the laws setting the baseline conditions that apply absent a specific contract to the contrary. An offer and acceptance of employment on specific terms, if it meets the requirements for contract formatiom trumps the default terms unless it is blocked by something in the law. That’s why important employees (e.g., top execs, 9f nothing else) in most firms have specific contracts with terms that are not at-will employment (and why union contracts exist, too.)

nradov 4y ago

Depending on the exact facts of a particular case that would be considered constructive dismissal under the labor laws in most US states. Employers can terminate at-will employees at any time for any reason or no reason (with a few limited exceptions). But if an employer substantially changes the terms of your employment — like by forcing you to work in an office — and fires you for cause then you should still be able to obtain unemployment insurance. Of course, as a practical matter it's better to just avoid the whole mess if you have better options.

jrs235 4y ago

But if/when you decline to work in an office you'll have documentation making it much more difficult for them to try and deny an unemployment insurance claim if you put one in.