[VinLucero]

My biggest takeaway from this was the ableist messaging:

“You cannot dangle what people need to effectively work in front of them like a carrot and subtly threaten to take it away. It’s ableist. You wouldn’t dare to do that with elevators or other accessibility features at the office, so don’t do it with that either.”

[Bjartr]

> You wouldn’t dare to do that with elevators or other accessibility features

This is only because there's usually legal protection for that kinds of accessibility features. If employers could legally, it would be way more common to threaten to take them away.

I have no doubt there are some that do so illegally.

[marcosdumay]

It being legal doesn't stop it from being ableist.

[Bjartr]

My only point is that accessibility features aren't treated specially because they're respected, but because they're protected.

[zeroonetwothree]

You have “no doubt” that employers threaten to take away elevators?

[devmor]

I would agree with their sentiment. I don't know how common it would be, but it would certainly happen at least in some occasions.

When I was young, I worked in a call center in which the bathroom was taken away as a punishment for bad rates on multiple occasions, until someone called the Dept. of Labor over it.

[SV_BubbleTime]

IDK, sitting in a call center can’t be good for you. So imagine complaining at the beneficial favor they did for you.

[Bjartr]

They're are some extremely callous assholes out there running businesses (as there are in every walk of life) so it doesn't take much effort to find stories of terrible employers taking advantage of underinformed employees. Why would this particular item be any different?

[christhecaribou]

Some infamous billionaire wanted to build mega-dorms for universities without windows. Yeah, these billionaire fucks will cut corners wherever they can.

[arrowsmith]

"would"