Leaked messages show Amazon will force a ‘voluntary resignation’ on employees failing to relocate near their team ‘hubs’::undefined
Leaked messages show Amazon will force a ‘voluntary resignation’ on employees failing to relocate near their team ‘hubs’::undefined
Sounds like the solution is to say, “Yes,” then never show up onsite. Make them fire you, so you’re entitled to unemployment benefits and any severance.
You don’t even have to say yes. Just refuse to relocate it, and when they say you have to resign, just don’t.
But if 50% resign because they think they have to, that’s 50% less unemployment Amazon has to pay
No. The solution is to call their bullshitnout.
A company can’t hire you to work from one location (regardless if it’s WFH or not,) and then unilaterally decide to have you relocate.
“You can apply internally” or anything else that is a new contract doesn’t matter. They’re changing the terms of employment, and they can’t do that unilaterally.
The choices are to agree with their new terms, accept the “out” of taking another position in your area, or reject them. They can use what ever semantics they want, but it’s still a layoff.
You know how a lot of job applications say something like “Have you ever been fired?”. That is a pretty strong filter. When you are expecting hundreds, if not thousands, of applications from everyone who knows how to look at linkedin, you need to set those filters up. And it becomes a roll of the dice as to whether “worked at a FAANG” gets you auto interviewed or “been fired” gets you auto rejected. And, if you are not currently working for them, employment verification is not too uncommon. Everyone saw the blog posts about how to lie on your CV. So if there is no risk of “Fred will get fired if we ask Amazon if he works there” then HR will ask… and get an earful.
So it stands to reason that most staff are more likely to just resign and lose their severance rather than take the termination.
Constructive dismissal isn’t the same thing as being fired for cause, regardless of whether Amazon tries to lie about it.
And I am sure Amazon will make that distinction when they get called about the person who actively spited them and forced a firing/termination when they were otherwise going to get to skip out on unemployment and severance.
But hey, you can sue. That worked out real well for the ex-twitter employees… and even people amazon dicked over in the past.
Like a lot of things in life: it doesn’t actually matter who is morally or legally in the right. What matters is what the bad actors can get away with.
If you get to the interview stage and say “look, you should know that I was part of the team that were fired as part of this news article” then you are basically set. Any company worth working for will say “Jesus christ, that is fucked”. But if HR calls amazon to make sure you aren’t some kid who was lying on linkedin? You are now not just a bad potential employee, you are a liar. And that is the kind of thing that can potentially even come up in conversations with colleagues.
Have you ever been fired?
Lie. They lie to you, you lie to them. They’re not the government. The worst they can do is fire you if they ever found out, which they won’t.
That’s job abandonment and would disqualify from unemployment benefits.