4 ms·

Asking salaried employees to spend three days in the office isn’t exploitative, and it’s certainly not equivalent to mass layoffs or termination without cause.

cr__ 3y ago
Changing the conditions of employment unilaterally is exploitative, especially within a system in which employment is required to maintain access to health care.
- boringg 3y ago
  No it does not qualify as exploitative - is it a tough adjustment? Probably yes, exploitative? No. Your health care example has little weight unless you are in a one employer town as you can always find other employers if you don't like one as much as that process isn't great.
  - dopple 3y ago
    Don't like being exploited by Company A? Try being exploited by Company B instead!
  - dangerlibrary 3y ago
    Out of curiosity, what would qualify as exploitative behavior in your opinion? Only situations where people have literally zero alternatives? Only situations where other employment alternatives meet your personal subjective threshold of "worse"?
garciasn 3y ago
On top of the promise of remote work for the last several years and then changing the terms of employment w/o any tangible reason, asking salaried employees to pay for incremental childcare, transit cost, potential COL increase, and personal time cost w/o any compensation is definitely exploitive. Sure, you want me to go back on two years of financial gains? Pay me the difference I've gained in that time and I might give it some thought.
- geodel 3y ago
  Its simple really. Just go and ask your employer to pay difference. If they say no don't move.
dangerlibrary 3y ago
In many cases, asking salaried employees to spend three days in the office is constructive dismissal [0]. Those employees may have moved to places with cheaper housing. They may have multi-hour commutes, kids in new schools, and may have just paid the high fixed costs of a real estate transaction - because they were told they did not need to come into the office. It may be infeasible for them to come back, so they'll quit without needing to be paid severance. As a sibling comment said - changing the terms of employment unilaterally is exploitative - I'm just providing some color to the same sentiment. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_dismissal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_dismissal
- brewdad 3y ago
  Those people made a choice to uproot their lives completely of their own volition. Sometimes those choices don't work out and they always come with consequences.
  - dangerlibrary 3y ago
    It's not obvious to me why you made this comment in this thread. Are you under the impression I would disagree? Making choices based on the best information you have, because your employer provided it to you, and then having your life unilaterally uprooted by that same employer seems like a bad thing. It also seems like something that an employer should probably explain / justify with a business reason other than "vibes" and "everyone else is doing it." If the employer doesn't do the bare minimum to even explain the decision to the employee, people are gonna use words like "exploitative behavior" and "kinda fucked up" and I'm going to agree with them.
    - ghaff 3y ago
      To the degree that people were explicitly told that they'd be able to work from home indefinitely, it certainly deserves more than an "Oops. We changed our mind." On the other hand, during the pandemic, companies (somewhat understandably) made a lot of fairly vague and open-ended statements about future plans and a lot of employees read those statements in accordance with what they wanted to be the case even if it was far from set in stone.

cr__ 3y ago

Changing the conditions of employment unilaterally is exploitative, especially within a system in which employment is required to maintain access to health care.

boringg 3y ago
No it does not qualify as exploitative - is it a tough adjustment? Probably yes, exploitative? No. Your health care example has little weight unless you are in a one employer town as you can always find other employers if you don't like one as much as that process isn't great.
- dopple 3y ago
  Don't like being exploited by Company A? Try being exploited by Company B instead!
- dangerlibrary 3y ago
  Out of curiosity, what would qualify as exploitative behavior in your opinion? Only situations where people have literally zero alternatives? Only situations where other employment alternatives meet your personal subjective threshold of "worse"?

garciasn 3y ago

On top of the promise of remote work for the last several years and then changing the terms of employment w/o any tangible reason, asking salaried employees to pay for incremental childcare, transit cost, potential COL increase, and personal time cost w/o any compensation is definitely exploitive. Sure, you want me to go back on two years of financial gains? Pay me the difference I've gained in that time and I might give it some thought.

geodel 3y ago
Its simple really. Just go and ask your employer to pay difference. If they say no don't move.

dangerlibrary 3y ago

In many cases, asking salaried employees to spend three days in the office is constructive dismissal [0]. Those employees may have moved to places with cheaper housing. They may have multi-hour commutes, kids in new schools, and may have just paid the high fixed costs of a real estate transaction - because they were told they did not need to come into the office. It may be infeasible for them to come back, so they'll quit without needing to be paid severance. As a sibling comment said - changing the terms of employment unilaterally is exploitative - I'm just providing some color to the same sentiment. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_dismissal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_dismissal

brewdad 3y ago
Those people made a choice to uproot their lives completely of their own volition. Sometimes those choices don't work out and they always come with consequences.
- dangerlibrary 3y ago
  It's not obvious to me why you made this comment in this thread. Are you under the impression I would disagree? Making choices based on the best information you have, because your employer provided it to you, and then having your life unilaterally uprooted by that same employer seems like a bad thing. It also seems like something that an employer should probably explain / justify with a business reason other than "vibes" and "everyone else is doing it." If the employer doesn't do the bare minimum to even explain the decision to the employee, people are gonna use words like "exploitative behavior" and "kinda fucked up" and I'm going to agree with them.
  - ghaff 3y ago
    To the degree that people were explicitly told that they'd be able to work from home indefinitely, it certainly deserves more than an "Oops. We changed our mind." On the other hand, during the pandemic, companies (somewhat understandably) made a lot of fairly vague and open-ended statements about future plans and a lot of employees read those statements in accordance with what they wanted to be the case even if it was far from set in stone.