• ThatWeirdGuy1001@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    We need to abolish right to work laws. Or at least restructure them. I shouldn’t be able to be fired for literally any reason they can come up with. Even fast food jobs should have contracts with certain clauses to protect the workers. You sign it when you start and you can’t be let go until it expires or you break it.

    • MirthfulAlembic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      52
      ·
      2 years ago

      Not that I disagree with your premise, but that’s an “at will” law area, not “right to work” (can’t be forced to join a union/pay union dues in a unionized workplace).

      To add, some argue at will is fair because it goes both ways, but it definitely doesn’t. If your employer fires you suddenly for no reason, there’s no real consequences. If you quit suddenly for no reason, you can get blackballed.

      • ThatWeirdGuy1001@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        2 years ago

        Yeah I knew it wasn’t the right wording I just couldn’t remember exactly what it was called.

        But that’s exactly what I was bringing up. I’m supposed to work a 2 week notice but they can fire me instantly because I didn’t smile at the manager when walking into work.

      • QHC@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        If your employer fires you suddenly for no reason, there’s no real consequences.

        Depends on the industry and location. If they do that a few times in relatively small industry, or in a captured but small market, word gets around and suddenly that company has difficulty hiring in the future.

        • MirthfulAlembic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          That’s true. I work in a somewhat “small” work world for my area of expertise, and word does get around about bad employers. People seem to have a short memory once they start offering higher salaries, even though they never keep those up with inflation. A few years later, and they’re working for a shit boss with average pay.

    • Velociraptor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      2 years ago

      I was fired earlier this year because they manufactured some drama after I needed a sudden comprehensive additional surgery when a planned one round something alarming that demanded specialist surgeons. I feel like we really should not be in a country where a company can decide to screw your life at time of firing and then screw you for future jobs by not providing anything truthful about your time there. I’m still struggling months later, including the general anxiety of knowing I could go bust my ass for someone and have them do this to me all over again. Fuck this predatory atmosphere we seem to just celebrate.

      • Drusas@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 years ago

        And you’re not entitled to FMLA until you’ve been somewhere for a year! Our society is so hostile to the average person.

    • TheLowestStone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 years ago

      At least in the states that I’ve worked in (NY anf CA) if you’re terminated without documentation proving cause, you qualify for unemployment benefits.

        • TheLowestStone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Yes, but the point is this costs the company money. It’s not a great system but I’ve been in management for 20 years and I’ve never worked for a company that would allow me to fire without cause due to that.

    • Foggyfroggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      Why do you hate capitalism?! /s But seriously, I agree. Government regulation is the only thing that can force a corporation to do something that hurts profits like respecting workers’ rights.

    • Iteria@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      The question I have about people who are against at will is the flip side, which is being locked into a hellish job for some set period. I have had jobs that deteriorated my mental health. With at will I can just walk out the door whenever I want. Not so if both employer and employee are bound by some cool down counter clause.

      Even without abuse there is opportunity cost to staying at your company. I’ve seen family members on the spot quit to care for people they cared about, but not people anyone would consider close enough to be covered by anything like FMLA, like your best friend’s child. I quit jobs that interfered with my college education.

      It sucks to be let go, but I don’t think people consider if it might make more suffering yo be forced to stay. I can’t see a situation where companies have to give notice, but employees don’t. Sure I guess employees can sabotage their workplaces to be sent home with pay, but what a fantastic way to catch a charge and screw yourself over forever.

      It’s food for thought.

      • Kiernian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 years ago

        Are you saying that in countries where employers can’t just make up reasons to divest themselves of employees without repercussion or paying unemployment that the employees themselves are somehow bound to their employer and can’t just walk out?

        Unless you’re under some contract, I don’t see how that would be enforced other than having laws on the books in individual countries about a minimum required notice.

        Even if a country DOES have laws on the books stating all employees in all full time jobs must provide x weeks of notice before quitting, if the same country has a bunch more clauses to protect employees from employers than the U.S. currently does I have to imagine there are protections in place for the employees in cases of hostile work environments or whatever.

        I can’t see a situation where a country that protects employees from the sort of hostile, predatory, dehumanizing behavior we see carried out consistently by U.S. companies wouldn’t have continued to take said employees into account while also protecting their country’s employers from things like large scale business-wide walkouts or whatnot.

        • Iteria@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          I obviously don’t know for sure, but I do see stories from people from those nations talking about how they have to say for whatever amount of time for a notice period. This is the thing where I have questions about abuse. I’m not saying at will is great, but I also don’t think it’s 100% awful and I think people should consider what it would be like to not be able to leave a job when you want to.

      • dreadgoat@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        In practice, employment contracts are always good for employees and usually bad for employers. You don’t want to be locked into a job? Then don’t sign a contract that locks you in. Just refuse, as just about any sane person would.

        Employers WOULD refuse to be locked in, except sane governments force them to. Sane governments do not force regular citizens into indentured servitude.

      • ThatWeirdGuy1001@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        That’s why I brought up a restructuring. The ability to quit whenever should always be an option but being fired without notice for anything that isn’t just gross incompetence/negligence should not. I should be able to quit because my manager pissed me off. I shouldn’t get fired because I pissed the manager off.

        • Iteria@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          It’s not that I disagree, it’s just that I can never see a scenario where both sides don’t have the same power. If you can quit at any time, then rhe employer can fire at any time. If you the employer has you give notice, so do you. I’ve never hear any stories online in different countries of the notice period not being both ways. And despite what one dude said to me sometimes weeks long, not a week. That would be actual hell.

          • ThatWeirdGuy1001@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            The difference is the employer has inherent power by being a money providing service as well as providing whatever other service/product they provide.

            When you employ that many people the power naturally rises to the top. That’s why we need legislature to prevent that massive gap in power. Of course no one at the top will support this but the needs of the many outweigh the few regardless of how much money they have.

            Remember corporate bailouts? “wE bAiLeD tHeM oUt BeCaUsE tHeY pRoViDe JoBs!!!”

            Then there were mass layoffs.

  • dynamojoe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Surely a publication like The Wall Street Journal wouldn’t have an agenda to support… go back to the office and be grateful for your ever-shrinking share, plebians

  • sparemethewearysigh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    2 years ago

    My company initiated a hiring freeze last November, just after my group lost 3 team members. Then in February they did layoffs, my group was not effected. The hiring freeze is now lifted, but what we were never told is that when they did the layoffs, they also “erased” any positions that were open prior to the layoffs, including the positions that were open in my group before the hiring freeze the previous November. So those jobs are just gone, and the slack that my group has picked up? That’s just the new normal now. It’s bullshit.

    • Kbobabob@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 years ago

      So you’re doing more work for the same pay? If it’s not in the job description/contract, then they can fuck off.

    • bobzilla@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Tell them it’s against your religion to take on extra work without extra compensation.

  • Tygr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Quiet Cutting is also done in ways the article is not mentioning. We used to call them hiring freezes. In the mortgage industry where there are positions with higher attrition, they simply allow the employees to quit and they never rehire that position.

    • Foggyfroggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Isn’t this just standard operating procedure? And, the funniest part is if they can operate without those people what fool hired them in the first place? Typical corporate speak trying to spin it in their favor.

        • Foggyfroggy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          2 years ago

          That’s my point. The company was poorly run if they hired 4 people each with enough “slack” that 2 could leave and the job still gets done.

          • dyathinkhesaurus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 years ago

            To your point: those two people are possibly doing 10-12 hour days and 6-day weeks now, just to get it done (and keep their jobs). There was no “slack” to begin with. “Slack” may be a misnomer here.

  • comedy@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    I practice quiet shitting while at work. I don’t let anyone know I’m leaving the office, and I head down the elevator to the downstairs bathroom. It’s a nice break from work. I recommend it to anyone.

    • TheDubz87@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      2 years ago

      Reassigning people into jobs that they hate in hopes that they quit, to avoid paying severance packages.

      We have a guy at the company I work for that just went through this. They did away with his division, reassigned him to a new department where you’re on call 24/7 working holidays and weekends. He jumped ship to us, but because they didn’t fire him, he got no payout because he wasn’t let go.

      • athos77@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        They did away with his division, reassigned him to a new department where you’re on call 24/7 working holidays and weekends

        He might have a case for constructive dismissal; he might want to talk with an employment lawyer. Constructive dismissal can include “Making unreasonable changes to an employees’ working hours or place of work”.

        • TheDubz87@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 years ago

          Maybe, I’ll bring that up to him. But they’ve done this to every department. Project managers are now trying to handle way more than they should and techs are either green as grass or completely overwhelmed with work.

          They actually pay us now for the services that they did away with within their own company (whatever sense that makes), so he basically has the same job, just with us. We work with this company closely so we knew him pretty well already and honestly we were happy to bring him on. No training required lol I think he just wanted to get out before his life got turned upside down.

      • metaStatic@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 years ago

        tale as old as time. we’ll make your life a living hell until you quit just so we don’t have to pay to fire you.

      • Drusas@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        I didn’t get any severance because I was “laid off” after I became disabled. Probably should have fought that, but…I had just become disabled.

      • Punkie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 years ago

        When I did sales management in the late 80s to mid 90s, we called them “penalty boxes.” To get a manager to quit, you reassign then to a store or location that is either guaranteed to be soul sucking, high crime, or otherwise not profitable enough to make commission or bonuses. They do that in education as well, like send teachers to difficult schools to get them to quit and skirt union rules.

      • jbrains@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        Reassigning people into jobs that they hate in hopes that they quit, to avoid paying severance packages.

        IBM technique.

        Nice.

    • kinsnik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 years ago

      it is. quiet quitting is a bullshit word that corporate created to make people feel guilty for just doing their jobs, because you are supposed to live for work or something. it is all bullshit