2 ms·

That's not coercion. If an employer can coerce an employee merely by requiring some compliance actions to remain employed, our legal system has a much bigger pr

That's not coercion. If an employer can coerce an employee merely by requiring some compliance actions to remain employed, our legal system has a much bigger problems on its hands than this case.

autoexec 4y ago
From the wiki, coercion is distinguished by things like: > the intent, the willingness to cause harm, the result of the interaction, and the options available to the coerced party If the intent is to get people to hand over sensitive data knowingly violating the law and putting people at risk because it makes things easier for the company, I think there's a case to be made that it is coercion. White castle employees aren't exactly known for having a ton of "options available" either. I doubt very many employees have dreamed of working there because of their passion for steamed meats or love for the company. Seems like more of a "when I have zero other options" kind of career move to me.