[cableshaft]

> "Remote work is here to stay and will never go away" early on and often. It wasn't until about a year in that they started changing their tune and gaslighting us with "we never said remote work was here to stay, where did you get such a silly idea?"

Pretty much exactly this happened at my company. They started touting these new offices they got for a steal, but in the all-hands said "our company has never required anyone to come in to the office and we never will". Three months later, they start encouraging everyone to come in once a week. Three months later, they changed it to 'we expect you to be in 4 days a week', and in the all-hands one of the founders went "We never said we wouldn't have you come back into the office. I love seeing people in person, that would be silly of me to say!"

Technically it's not a requirement, just an "expectation", so I still haven't gone in more than necessary. But I'm not expecting a great performance review next year because of it, and I'm not sure how much longer I'll stick around either (it does look like most other places are being even worse about it right now, though). I was so angry to hear that.

Not the only time they gaslit either. They also had a round of layoffs about six months ago while trying not to call them layoffs ("we let a bunch of people go today, it's not a layoff though, they just weren't performant enough to work here"), that really rubbed me the wrong way too.

[lazide]

If it’s not in writing, it ‘never happened’ - and even then, make sure you have a copy they can’t get at and know your odds of a successful prosecution under the law (and your ability and willingness to see it through).

Because sometimes that will be required.

[lotsofpulp]

Prosecution for what? Business leaders (and employees) are allowed to change their course of action anytime.

I would keep it anyway for your records, due to it helping your claim for unemployment benefits by establishing constructive dismissal as opposed to termination for cause. But it might not work even then.

[lazide]

For shitty companies, wage theft is a not uncommon scenario when things like this start to happen (as in the overall economic/industry shifts, not just RTO).

When changing direction results in actionable torts against employees, then employees are also entitled to be made whole (to some extent).

And I meant prosecution in the sense of ‘driving to an actual successful resolution including getting paid what you’re owed’ - which can be for breach of contract, illegal dismissal, constructive dismissal, etc.

There are a million ways for a company to fire someone without ‘firing’ them, which they’ll often use if they don’t want to pay out unemployment/owed vacation or the like. Many companies will target expensive employees first (age/seniority, expensive physical health issues, mental health problems, or they just think they ‘aren’t a team player’, or are harder to manager. etc.).

[snotrockets]

Oh, they put it in writing. Then they wrote something else.

[lazide]

Sounds like it’s time for a folder.

[SketchySeaBeast]

Or to check if that original all-hands teams call was recorded.

[soco]

Then what? Okay you can prove them liars, but that won't surprise anybody and won't change anything in the course of the company. I don't even mention the likely personal repercussions from speaking truth to power: "not being a team player" and and and.

[lazide]

If one is already being fired or forced out due to broken promises, depending on their personal circumstances and how well documented such broken promises are it could be worthwhile suing them for it.

You are quite correct that continuing on with the company (or in that corner of the industry) may - well, likely will be - impossible afterwards. Few things say 'burnt bridges' like a lawsuit. That said, being fired because of a promise they broke is them starting the bridge on fire anyway.

Either way, the CYA handbook is - document, document, document. And keep it where no one but you has control over it. You have no power if you can't prove anything. And documents 'go missing' or get 'automatically removed' from company equipment all the time in situations like this.

knowing if you even have a case or complaint is also important - which is only going to be possible if you can see what was actually said (not what you remember being said) or written. Sometimes we hear what we want to hear, not what was said. Knowing that BEFORE you show up in court is rather important.

[_puk]

Generally[0] your contract references a living policy document covering the softer areas.

I see changes to these documents as similar to the change in T's & C's for any service I use; your continued use of the service denotes acceptance of the new terms. You're welcome to leave at any time.

Not sure what you can litigate against.

0: anecdotal from the past 15 years

[lazide]

If they actually put in writing ‘Remote is forever’, then later try to fire you for refusing to return to the office - what judge in the world is going to rule in their favor?

If course, they rarely actually say that. But some folks have definitely been dumb enough to do so.

The issue with contract law is that most folks never put things in writing, so it’s a pain to litigate many claims, which makes it uneconomic to recover damages.

But if it’s in writing? Sounds like an easy to show breach of contract to me!

[soco]

Often it might be in writing as a company newsletter or communicated in a call, but not in writing as your employment contract. Mine was always vague on how much can be spent in home office (was never a problem, then or now) and I assume it might be often the case for other companies. Thus anything the management allows or requires is possible and no judge will decide on the basis of a newsletter. So I'm afraid in the end you only can vote with your feet.

[lazide]

Sounds like they were smart about it in the case you’re talking about, both in word and in action.

Flexibility (both in being able to say yes, and no) is important. Not being abusive is important too.

A lot of folks have lost their minds over the last few years (more than most), and it’s going to be interesting for sure how this all plays out.

[_puk]

Granted. If you want something set in stone, add it to your contract.

If it's a general policy that "we are remote", but your contract wasn't updated to reflect that, then don't be surprised if it changes.

[lazide]

If the general policy is updated to ‘remote is forever’, save a copy - that’s part of your contract too!

If it gets changed in a way that causes you injury, guess what - you can be and should be compensated. If you can prove these things, then it should even be relatively easy to do so.

Contract law is not just things that say ‘contract’ on them. It is about agreements between parties.

Also, talk to a lawyer so they can look over the fine print and applicable statutes. They matter.

[abustamam]

When people say "talk to a lawyer" how does one go about finding a lawyer? Like in this case, would it be an employment lawyer, a contract lawyer? And what sorts of rates could we expect? Obviously it varies depending on the contract, but I always see people advise that people talk to a lawyer when doing XYZ which makes sense, but I never understood the exact process for this.

[enobrev]

A hiring contract isn't Terms of Service or a EULA. Your job isn't a service to you, it's an employer. You make a deal with a company in which you offer your time and expertise for pay and amenities. That contract with the company binds them as much as it binds you.

Anything non-monetary that they take away from you should be offered in compensation and/or renegotiation. You should not be allowing changes to your employment contract without approval, especially ones where they are removing amenities.

[fieldcny]

Correction, the company was not performant enough to keep them working there…

[cableshaft]

Considering several of them were in between client projects through no fault of their own (a few of the people laid off I worked with personally and were only transitioned off my project because the client was trying to save some money and didn't really need graphic design work at that point), yeah I'd agree.

The company has already had to revise down their earnings estimates a couple times this year, and hasn't bothered to replace about 20-30 other employees that have quit in the months since then (despite several of them being star employees).

That's why it felt like gaslighting to me, claiming these people weren't good employees and that's why "it wasn't a layoff" (even if that were true, it's still a layoff).