3 ms·

this, seems like an easy way to reduce headcount without having to pay severance benefits

• mannykannot 3y ago
  The options are either return to the office or leave with severance benefits. The company probably wants to limit the grounds on which the National Labor Relations Board might get involved - especially if, as is widely suspected, this is covertly a union-busting move.
  • supertimor 3y ago
    Not very covert really. A week after workers announced they were unionizing, Grindr hired lawyers who specialize in employer labor relations and what they’re calling “union avoidance” (aka union busting). And then two weeks later Grindr announces their relocation/RTO mandate. From Littler Mendelson’s website (Grindr’s lawyers): “We guide companies in developing and initiating strategies that lawfully avoid unions” But yeah, I agree severance is probably their strategy to limit any pushback the NLRB might have on this, but just not sure how strong of a case Grindr can make. Especially after the recent rulings from the NLRB that gives more protections to workers trying to unionize.
• dclowd9901 3y ago
  Doesn’t really work like that. An employee can’t be forced to move for work, so at some point the company will have to fire them. That said, companies are _never_ under any obligation to pay severance, just unemployment insurance.
  • euniceee3 3y ago
    In the US they are federally required to provide severance if it meets certain conditions. https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/Layoff/pdfs/WorkerWARN2003.pdf https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/Layoff/pdfs/Worke...