[Roark66]

>- Forcing employees who were hired as remote employees to relocate for RTO

And that is why when I was recently looking for (contract) work I insisted to have "work from home" out in my contract. Despite looking for wfh from the beginning and multiple verbal and email assurances when it came to sign the contract I got one that said "office based". Of course I said I'm not signing. A week of "but we have a standard contract", "but we can't change it" ensued. Eventually they did change it.

I recommend persevering to anyone else in similar situation (if you have other offers of course).

[nucleardog]

Switched jobs for the same reason.

Employer went remote. After a while they decided we’d stay that way. At contract negotiation time I told them I wanted my contract amended to specify that the role was remote with no expectation of any time in the office. They wouldn’t because who knows what the future holds.

Well, I knew what I wanted my future to hold and it wasn’t compatible with anything but full remote.

Found a remote role with a company that already had its employees spread across like 6 states and three countries. My contract, without asking, said the role was remote with no time in office. Regardless, I wouldn’t see them demanding RTO any time soon—whatever location they picked they’d be losing probably 2/3 of their staff, or paying to open tiny one-person offices all over the place.

In hiring others, so many people I talk to spend a lot of time in the initial call asking about the remote thing. They’ve clearly had the rug pulled out from under them before.

I’ve had a few people now bail partway through the process because they got a great offer from some other company only to come back a week later asking if we can pick back up because it was a bait-and-switch and the final contract specified hybrid or fully in-office.

I just don’t even understand the thought process behind that from the employers… like, do you really think you’ll get to the offer stage and the person will go “Well, I really wanted remote and they lied to my face, but hey one in the hand I guess I’ll start planning a move halfway across the country. shrug”.

[monero-xmr]

Any company that claims they can’t amend a contract is full of shit. That’s literally how business operates - they negotiate and change contracts all day long.

[ballenf]

There are caveats, however. Making exceptions for employees can raise alarms in HR compliance. If an employee in a protected class has asked for the same, but perhaps cannot be granted the same terms, it could create liability.

Larger companies really, really don't like having terms vary across their non-executive level employees. And, arguably, for good reason.

[boringg]

Can't = don't want to.

[williamsmj]

This is good advice for contract workers, but is not applicable for the vast majority of "at will" W-2 employees in the US, where terms of employment can be amended ... at will.

[smeej]

It does help you when you have to talk to the unemployment claim adjudicator and the employer tries to claim you quit.

If you can say, "They made a huge change to the terms of my employment. See? Right here, when they hired me, it said 100% remote role," then they're still on the hook for the charge even though you "voluntarily" quit.

(Source: Spent a couple years adjudicating UI claims early in my career.)

[williamsmj]

That's a good point! (Although in practice I assume the terms of a "voluntary resignation" under something like https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-voluntary-resignation... are written to make that claim very difficult.)