Board 8 > Hybrid remote work is so disrespectful

(+) Yeah! (+)

redrocket posted...

I mean, hes literally on display to the public, so all this would actually serve a purpose at his job!

Well...I suppose yes in this particularly bizarre scenario. Normally not true of 99% of technology (and adjacent) desk jobs.

colliding posted...

god I hate remote work

give me an office, get me out of the house, give me a commute.

I welcome your ability to have that opportunity, just as long as others have the opportunity to do the opposite.

redrocket posted...

I mean, hes literally on display to the public, so all this would actually serve a purpose at his job!

Hopefully he's white too

foolm0r0n posted...

Hopefully he's white too

I am, but the higher ups don't want the place looking too white

The C levels are all white, but the employees who are obligated to come into the office are pretty diverse lmao

Man I didn't expect people to actually defend RTO here

Wild

I've worked from home since 2013, and I will never go back to an in office job. I hate people.

Lol, I second the farcity of diversity when the c-suite of most companies is all white men with maybe one white woman.

UltimaterializerX posted...

If you live in a one party consent state (I think only Oregon and Connecticut aren't), this is an easy problem to fix.

Assuming you're talking about recording, it's a lot more than just those two that require two-party consent

VintageGin posted...

Man I didn't expect people to actually defend RTO here

Wild

You think there are no managers on b8? It seems like the most b8 job!

foolm0r0n posted...

You think there are no managers on b8? It seems like the most b8 job!

I'm a manager

This is driven more by execs and people who would drink whatever kool-aid was presented to them

foolm0r0n posted...

Not too close though, otherwise you're a lazy entitled millennial

Also, the complaint is that he's required to be an architectural ornament. How is it simple to get an extra job requirement suddenly hoisted on to you with no explanation?

The main complaint seems to be the mandatory training sessions. But he admits he's too lazy to find a job other than being an architectural ornament. If that's the role of the job, and he doesn't like it, he is free to find a different one if he had the motivation.

Otherwise, as I said, go in and do your job.

He's lazy but that's beside the point. Your boss can't just add arbitrary things to your job, that's called wage slavery.

oh my god i am in the meeting why are we doing this

"ok everyone we're going to our breakout rooms, tell us about your trigger words"

"as an asian who grew up in the south let me tell you about the jokey racism that men of other races use to ingratiate themselves to me"

"people who ask me if i speak spanish, depending on the context though. i speak fluent spanish, though, it's my first language"

we have over 2 hours to go

"i have an overdeveloped fight-or-flight mechanism from childhood, which we don't have to get into, but anyway if someone gets really loud or emotional i get uncomfortable and shut down"

this is bizarre, i will not participate in this, good lord

You should just link them to this topic

That meeting reminds me of a time my last job brought us together online for a team-building exercise to talk about WHAT LAWS WE WOULD BREAK IF WE COULD GET AWAY WITH IT.

I let everybody else go first. When it got to me, I guilted all of them for coming together to talk about committing crimes on company time. They doubled down on me seeking an answer, and I eventually said I wished smoothies cost two dollars less.

They laughed but I think they got more mad and disappointed at me. They should have been mad and disappointed at us having a meeting based on that.

All that's to say some companies have been embarrassing in their failure to change with the times post-pandemic. That job had a poor understanding of work culture post-pandemic, and they lost 12% of their employees in three months just from going from 100% to 90% WFH...and that 12% were right to leave because they couldn't justify the purpose of an office anymore. If it doesn't have to be done in person, don't make people change to do it in person.

Anyway I work 100% WFH again elsewhere now.

My job switched us to 3 days a week in the office three weeks ago

I accepted a new job offer today that is fully WFH

foolm0r0n posted...

He's lazy but that's beside the point. Your boss can't just add arbitrary things to your job, that's called wage slavery.

Except they can and they do. Again, if you don't like it, find a different job. It's only wage slavery if you are unable to find something else, which clearly isn't the issue here. It's that he's too lazy to try.

I'm honestly worried you've been wage slaving man. They literally cannot do that. They can try, and fire you if you don't comply, but I don't think it's a valid termination reason in states that require that.

Slaving is not hustle and it's not working hard. It's pure opportunity cost that slows you down in your career, all for the hope of gaining some sort of respect from your boss. But here's the secret: masters don't respect their slaves, they see them as subhuman meat bags.

I'm gonna be doing hybrid remote with this job, excited for it to start

foolm0r0n posted...

I'm honestly worried you've been wage slaving man. They literally cannot do that. They can try, and fire you if you don't comply, but I don't think it's a valid termination reason in states that require that.

Employers can change your job duties at will and can fire you if you dont like it as long as the state is at will. I've never worked at a non at-will state so idk what its like there

Pretty much every job description I've seen has always had something along the lines of 'Other duties as required by management'.

Depends on the type of job I suppose

foolm0r0n posted...

Depends on the type of job I suppose

It's pretty much always as they say except to people who are self employed or ignorant

foolm0r0n posted...

I'm honestly worried you've been wage slaving man. They literally cannot do that. They can try, and fire you if you don't comply, but I don't think it's a valid termination reason in states that require that.

They literally can do that. It's called at-will employment and is found in the vast majority of US states.

I know what at will is which is why I mentioned it in my post. But if you use an invalid termination reason in an at will state you can still get sued.

Maybe we should all just skip the whole dancing around each other because we are talking about different things and get everyone on the same page:

https://shorturl.at/bOZ08

foolm0r0n posted...

I know what at will is which is why I mentioned it in my post. But if you use an invalid termination reason in an at will state you can still get sued.

The stuff you're mentioning isn't invalid though that's the point.