3 ms·
>> upper management tried to gaslight everyone into thinking on-call was just part of normal work and didn’t warrant additional compensation. > If it's made ex
by AdieuToLogic 2y ago
>> upper management tried to gaslight everyone into thinking on-call was just part of normal work and didn’t warrant additional compensation.
> If it's made explicitly clear in the job interview process that on call is expected in a role and if it's enforced evenly across the organization, this can absolutely be normal and ethical—you're on a specific salary and your salary includes on call expectations.
Where this logic breaks down is when on-call expectations are in addition to what a salaried position compensates - a 40-ish hour work week.
Expecting an employee to be paid industry rate for services rendered and then expecting periodic 24-168 hour near real-time availability without compensation is, by definition, "unpaid on-call".
- parpfish 2y agoAnd the frequency with which you have to take one of the 168-hour shifts is inversely proportional to how many colleagues you have in the rotation. if somebody leaves, the amount of unpaid work you have to do increases. So if on-call isn’t explicitly compensated, an employee quitting essentially gives the rest of the team more hours at a lower hourly rate.