3 ms·

I hope every single employee affected by clowns like this "chief people officer" sues their employer for promissory estoppel. Does anyone know of any organizati

I hope every single employee affected by clowns like this "chief people officer" sues their employer for promissory estoppel. Does anyone know of any organizations or individual attorneys who are helping affected employees explore this option? I'd like to donate some money if so.

UncleMeat 3y ago
Nobody who has a remote location on their contract has been affected. This is asking people who are already assigned a specific desk location to be at their desk.
- angoragoats 3y ago
  That may be the case for Google, though their request for remote folks to reconsider suggests they may crack down on those people too. Regardless, there have been stories of other companies [1] fully unwinding their remote work policies for all employees, and I’m referring to those as well. [1] https://www.businessinsider.com/insurance-ceo-changes-remote-policy-employees-threaten-quit-unionize-report-2023-6?op=1 https://www.businessinsider.com/insurance-ceo-changes-remote...
  - UncleMeat 3y ago
    Maybe that'll come in the future, but the fact that they are asking people (only those already located within driving distance to an office) to reconsider is evidence in the other direction to me. They could just end remote work altogether but are choosing not to.
    - angoragoats 3y ago
      That’s true. As I said, I was not referring only to google and there are other companies out there who are not treading as lightly as google is.
    - Rhapso 3y ago
      Corporate communication can't be isolated from being fundimentally coercive. Your employer can't politely ask you to reconsider anything without it being an implicit threat.
      - UncleMeat 3y ago
        I'd go beyond that. Everything a corporation is doing for you today is tenuous. Google doesn't need to politely ask you to consider switching back to an office desk to have the threat of coercion. After all, the people who were fired in January weren't given any communication that carried an implicit threat ahead of time. It was just "boom, you are gone." Nothing about the fact that US labor laws give me stupendously little power against my employer has changed between last week and this week.

UncleMeat 3y ago

Nobody who has a remote location on their contract has been affected. This is asking people who are already assigned a specific desk location to be at their desk.

angoragoats 3y ago
That may be the case for Google, though their request for remote folks to reconsider suggests they may crack down on those people too. Regardless, there have been stories of other companies [1] fully unwinding their remote work policies for all employees, and I’m referring to those as well. [1] https://www.businessinsider.com/insurance-ceo-changes-remote-policy-employees-threaten-quit-unionize-report-2023-6?op=1 https://www.businessinsider.com/insurance-ceo-changes-remote...
- UncleMeat 3y ago
  Maybe that'll come in the future, but the fact that they are asking people (only those already located within driving distance to an office) to reconsider is evidence in the other direction to me. They could just end remote work altogether but are choosing not to.
  - angoragoats 3y ago
    That’s true. As I said, I was not referring only to google and there are other companies out there who are not treading as lightly as google is.
  - Rhapso 3y ago
    Corporate communication can't be isolated from being fundimentally coercive. Your employer can't politely ask you to reconsider anything without it being an implicit threat.
    - UncleMeat 3y ago
      I'd go beyond that. Everything a corporation is doing for you today is tenuous. Google doesn't need to politely ask you to consider switching back to an office desk to have the threat of coercion. After all, the people who were fired in January weren't given any communication that carried an implicit threat ahead of time. It was just "boom, you are gone." Nothing about the fact that US labor laws give me stupendously little power against my employer has changed between last week and this week.