[digitalchaos]

I wish my company did this when I had a kid. They gave me 2 weeks paid leave. Then I took 6 weeks semi-paid leave from the state. aaaaaand when I returned I was notified that since I "missed" a few weeks of on-call rotation during my leave that I was basically on-call for every day for the next month to "make up" for it. That was pretty awesome considering the production environment would break at least once every day between midnight and 6am. It made taking care of an 8 week old who needed feeding every few hours at night even easier.

[jasonkester]

Keep in mind that they didn't "tell" you that you'd be on call every night. They asked, and you said OK.

The fact that they didn't include a question mark at the end of the sentence doesn't change the fact. The correct answer is still "No, Of course not." It's then up to them to decide whether it's worth firing you for giving the sensible answer to their silly request.

[robertfw]

Ah yes, nothing like making a stand and losing your job while raising an 8 week old to add to your troubles.

[jacquesm]

> Keep in mind that they didn't "tell" you that you'd be on call every night. They asked, and you said OK.

Am I missing something or were you involved somehow?

[pc86]

You are being incredibly hostile throughout this thread.

[jacquesm]

You make no sense at all.

I simply asked a question prompted by this bit:

"Keep in mind that they didn't "tell" you that you'd be on call every night. They asked, and you said OK."

GGP did not suggest in any way that there was a dialogue, he simply said that he was told that he had the bad shift and that was that.

So either JasonKester knows more than is apparent from the comment or I don't understand where he got that knowledge, it's not as if walking out was on the list of viable options for the GGP.

Please indicate why you think I'm hostile, or is asking questions the new hostility?

[jasonkester]

The second paragraph explains the first. I imagine that's why somebody downvoted your reply.

Repeating though, in case it wasn't clear: When your boss says "Yeah, we're going to need you to come in on Saturday... yeah, we lost some people this week, and now we're gonna have to sorta play catch-up. And yeah, we're going to need you to go ahead and come in on Sunday too". That's a request. It's something you can (and should) say "No" to.

It's entirely possible that there may be ramifications for standing up for yourself in the face of silly demands from management. But there's absolute certainty of bad things happening if you don't. (Namely, the terrible thing you've just been asked to do, as well as dozens of repeat performances now that you've declared yourself as somebody who can be walked over.)

The best course is always to remain professional, stand up for yourself, and ensure that you remain on equal footing with your employer. If they do choose to fire you for working the hours you agreed to work when they hired you, there are worse things than being a skilled developer in the single best market for talent in history.

[jacquesm]

Right. But the whole point is that if you have just been handed a newborn then your option to 'walk out' is simply non-existent and so any principled stance would have to be postponed until the breadwinner is out of the danger zone. The employer here seems to be engaging in some kind of revenge tactic, as though the leave was to be made up for rather than something that left the balance between employer/employee and employee/co-workers in tact.

So I don't see this as a request at all, a request is something that you practically can say yes to, which doesn't appear to be the case here and does not come in the form of an order.

[pascalo]

that's a scummy thing to do. would've taken my hat and left.

[ssmoot]

Do you still work there?