Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Medicine Security The Almighty Buck IT Technology

Work-Life Balance: Cryptographer Fired By BAE Systems For Taking Care of Dying Wife (bostonglobe.com) 513

mdecerbo writes: A new lawsuit by cryptographer Don Davis against multinational defense giant BAE Systems highlights the fact that companies are free to have their boasts about "work-life balance" amount to nothing but idle talk. The Boston Globe reports that on his first day on the job, Davis explained that his wife had late-stage cancer. He would work his full work day in the office, but if he was needed nights or weekends, he'd want to work from home. His supervisor was fine with it, but the human resources department fired him on the spot after four hours of employment. The lawsuit raises interesting questions, such as whether employment law requires corporations to have the sort of common decency we expect from individuals. But what I want to know is, if BAE Systems loses this lawsuit, will they prevent future ones by making their "work-life balance" policy say simply: We own you, body and soul? Don Davis' lawyer, Rebecca Pontikes, contends he was discriminated against because the company "requires its male employees to be the stereotypical male breadwinner and to leave family responsibilities to women." BAE issued a statement to The Boston Globe saying, "we do not tolerate discrimination of any kind and work hard to provide our employees with flexible working options that enable them to have a meaningful work/life balance." The company declined to discuss specifics, citing pending litigation.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Work-Life Balance: Cryptographer Fired By BAE Systems For Taking Care of Dying Wife

Comments Filter:
  • WTF!!! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @03:16AM (#54034783)

    What?! He would work his full work day but if he was needed during night or weekend he would work from home and they fired him? For taking care of his dying wife?! Holy Jesus if only I could put my hands on the HR assholes department of BAE systems...I would teach them the lesson of their miserable life.

    • by Z00L00K ( 682162 )

      Just give all their relatives a strain of HeLa [wikipedia.org].

    • Re:WTF!!! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @04:55AM (#54034977)

      What?! He would work his full work day but if he was needed during night or weekend he would work from home and they fired him? For taking care of his dying wife?!

      You are jumping to conclusions that are not supported by evidence. We was fired on his first day of work. The reasons for that are not clear, but there is almost always more to these stories than what is on the surface. You are only hearing one very biased side of it.

      • by shri ( 17709 ) <{moc.liamg} {ta} {cmarirhs}> on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @05:27AM (#54035065) Homepage

        +1 - Like an onion, there are layers to this story which have not been peeled.

      • Re:WTF!!! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @05:40AM (#54035105)

        That might be. However, the most important thing here is in my opinion that employers have a terrible amount of control over their employees' lives. Here in the EU, and especially in Scandinavia, we have very good protection by law for workers in situations like these. There is also fair means of state-sponsored compensation for employees (especially smaller ones) that may otherwise suffer financially from an employees personal crisis.

        We need to start treat workers as humans and stop thinking private corporations have the right to anything and everything. They take advantage of the stable society we all provide for them. It should come with a responsibility to treat employees humanely.

        • Re:WTF!!! (Score:5, Insightful)

          by flink ( 18449 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @09:35AM (#54035965)

          We need to start treat workers as humans and stop thinking private corporations have the right to anything and everything. They take advantage of the stable society we all provide for them. It should come with a responsibility to treat employees humanely.

          I think it is telling that we call the people management department of our corporations human resources. It used to be the personnel department. Persons you relate to. Resources are things you exploit.

      • Ok, then I'm pretty sure you can come up with a scenario where someone agreeing to work beyond his normal working hours from home is a reason to fire him.

        • Re:WTF!!! (Score:5, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @06:09AM (#54035233)

          Ok, then I'm pretty sure you can come up with a scenario where someone agreeing to work beyond his normal working hours from home is a reason to fire him.

          easy. this was the cyber security team at BAE, a well known defense supplier. If he was hired as part of a incident response team dealing with classified environments with his role then he could easily have requirements to come into the office after hours as many environments cannot be accessed remotely. I have had that exact scenario myself working with another defense contractor.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      mind that average HR person is a woman, are you ready to put hands on a woman?

    • I'm not surprised these days. I had requested time off work when my daughter was in the hospital. Employer said I know she's sick but we need you here, if you can't be here.....well..... Pink slip came.
      • by ebyrob ( 165903 )

        If you legitimately had available PTO (Paid Time Off) and they didn't let you use it under those circumstances... That's really messed up, you would probably own them in court. In fact, even without PTO, that's against the Family Leave Act.

  • 24/7 job (Score:2, Informative)

    by roman_mir ( 125474 )

    Davis said, the woman didnâ(TM)t entertain temporary alternative arrangements, such as working from home if needed. She simply insisted he needed to be available at the office 24/7.

    - 24/7 ? Interesting arrangement. What do you need as compensation to accept an offer like that? I get it when a business owner has to work like that, but an employee? I am curious who takes this and for how much?

    • Re:24/7 job (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @03:29AM (#54034815)
      I had such a job for 2 years. My conditions were that regardless of what time I was called into the office I would receive double my hourly rate and I would be paid a minimum of 3 hours even if it only took me 10 mins to resolve. Generally this worked out to be almost a days pay for what usually was at most a 30 min fix, in 2 years I think only twice did I need to actually work more than 3 hours in these callins.
      • by Dr. Evil ( 3501 )

        Ditto.

        Then they made IT workers overtime exempt in the province of Ontario, meaning you'd get *nothing*.

        So I became a contractor.

        • The IT companies probably lobbied to make them exempt for the exact reason. So they could could pay you nothing extra and then claim they weren't even the bad guy.

          • Re:24/7 job (Score:5, Informative)

            by Dr. Evil ( 3501 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @05:30AM (#54035073)

            That's exactly what IBM did. It even ended pager-pay... since we were always on the clock.

            For reference, https://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/es/tools/srt/coverage_government_it.php [gov.on.ca]

            Information technology professionals are not entitled to overtime pay.

            And my favourite:

            Information technology professionals are not covered by the daily and weekly limits on hours of work

            From what I could find, these were laws meant to cover fisheries and agriculture, where the seasonal nature of the work meant that the only time you would work on a harvest or catch was when there would be work. It was understood that the nature of the work was feast-or-famine, and it was paid hourly. If they had to pay overtime, they would be paying nothing but overtime. Strangely, the rules also included accounting, some screwball argument that month-end and year end was a busy period and that people could take time in lieu or have downtime between busy periods.

            Somehow this slippery slope was extended to IT. As a salaried employee, it meant they could pay you *nothing*.

            Thank you Dalton McGuinty.

      • Re:24/7 job (Score:4, Interesting)

        by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @05:02AM (#54034993)

        I had such a job for 2 years.

        I did it for 4 years. My conditions were that they would provide me with a room to sleep in, and a shower. There was a kitchen in the break room, so I was all set. I saved a fortune by not renting an apartment in the SF Bay Area ($2000 / month for a studio).

        If a server crashed at 3am, I could get dressed and be in the machine room in 2 minutes (maybe 3 minutes if I needed to pee).

        • Re:24/7 job (Score:5, Insightful)

          by gsslay ( 807818 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @08:11AM (#54035581)
          Sounds like you gave up all chances of having a normal private life for 4 years to become a company drone. Fine for a short period, and if financially rewarding, but no way to spend a life.

          If a company wants me to be available 24/7, in the office, in addition to usual office hours, they would have to pay me a small fortune and I'd be planning my exit from day 1. Employing me does not mean you own my life.
          • Re:24/7 job (Score:4, Insightful)

            by meta-monkey ( 321000 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @10:30AM (#54036367) Journal

            Sounds like you gave up all chances of having a normal private life for 4 years to become a company drone.

            Yeah but for 4 years, and look at all the money he saved. That's "putting yourself through college" money. No you're not going to do that and raise a family, but if you're poor or an immigrant and need to bootstrap yourself? That's a damn good opportunity.

  • Wow. (Score:4, Informative)

    by Harlequin80 ( 1671040 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @03:17AM (#54034789)

    I work in the employment sector. This story would see the company dragged over the coals if it happened here in Australia. That and the individuals involved would also be personally liable.

    I don't even understand the wording of it. They didn't "rescind his offer of employment" as he had commenced work.

    • by mark-t ( 151149 )
      He probably hadn't even been at work long enough for all the paperwork to have been filled out that proved he was ever even an employee there in the first place. As far as HR was concerned at the time, he wasn't an employee yet, so a "rescinded" job offer would make sense from their perspective. And if they really wanted to be assholes (which it appears that they did, so why not go the whole ten yards?), they might have even been able to plausibly deny that he had even actually worked there for the alleg
    • Re:Wow. (Score:4, Interesting)

      by rtb61 ( 674572 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @04:02AM (#54034883) Homepage

      Due to this page http://www.baesystems.com/en/c... [baesystems.com] they are pretty much screwed any where in the world, when that page hits the court. False advertising, contractual misrepresentation and employment under false conditions. Why they chose this path, in this incident, is likely indicated of poor hiring practices, specifically the human resources twit, who will likely be looking for a new job (one rush of ego and power trip and millions of dollars of recruiting advertising pissed against the wall). That BAE have to self promote extensively to hire people into Death industries, is pretty indicative of unpopular working for them has become, if affect making their employees death eaters (oddly apt for them, http://scifi.stackexchange.com... [stackexchange.com] and they sick desire to fully control the deaths of others). It really is a crap industry, surviving on the death and misery on others but they like to tell themselves they provide for the defence of their country. Nah, just greedy and a lack of self conscious though to guide them past the immorality of their employment.

      Puts me in two minds about the victim, when employees or ex-employees of death industries want us to be sorry for them when they show not the slightest bit of sympathy or empathy for the people their efforts mangle, main and kill, men, women and children and even their pets. Like all things a choice but not empathy for others in your employment choice but you demand empathy. Might be a bit harsh but when those death industries actively and corruptly promote war, and lobby for more conflict with complete disregard for all those they kill, you have to start looking at their employees in a different way, even when you are related.

      • by Xyrus ( 755017 )

        You have a very naive view of what defense companies do.

        While some parts of these companies manufacture weapons of war, that is only one part of what they do. Take a company like, say, Northrop Grumman. Yeah, they develop drones. But they also develop things like the Webb telescope, emergency response systems for police/fire/etc., so on and so forth. Raytheon develops weather monitoring systems used by NWS. Lockheed has been pouring money into fusion research.

        Classifying defense industries as nothing but me

    • by rakslice ( 90330 )

      IMO, most countries have hours of work laws that mean an employer isn't in a position to ask employees to work 24x7 in the first place.

      • Re:Wow. (Score:4, Interesting)

        by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @05:09AM (#54035019)

        IMO, most countries have hours of work laws that mean an employer isn't in a position to ask employees to work 24x7 in the first place.

        They are not asking him to stay at his desk for 24 hours everyday. They are saying he should be available to work 24/7. I have had plenty of jobs with that requirement. I typically received a middle-of-the-night call once every month or two, but when they came, I was expected to deal with the issue. And, yes, I was paid well.

        • Re:Wow. (Score:4, Informative)

          by bsolar ( 1176767 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @05:48AM (#54035129)

          Even this in most countries this would be illegal. E.g. here by law an employee may not be required to work on call for more than seven days in any period of four weeks. On top of that, you are entitled at least 11 hours of uninterrupted rest time every day which can be reduced to 8 hours only once a week.

          Most companies actually *bar* you from exceeding these limits since violations would result in very harsh penalties not to mention the reputation damage.

          • Yeah. I temped for the Ordnance Survey in the UK for a year. Even though they weren't obliged (because the UK hadn't signed up to the EU working time directive, and we were temps so had bugger all rights) we weren't allowed to work overtime on both weekend days (as much as I wanted to as the pay was shit), because the OS subscribed to it (like many companies).

    • his story would see the company dragged over the coals if it happened here in Australia.

      Not if its a small business. The boss needs no justification at all if the employment was less than a year. Six months for a larger business. You can thank Howard for that bit of fuckery.

      • Yeah except that isn't in place any more. And while you can terminate during the probation period there are numerous reasons that are not permitted. Health and family being 2 of them.

  • by gravewax ( 4772409 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @03:18AM (#54034793)
    impossible to know whether this is a case of an evil company or a case of a self entitled git without knowing what was the conditions of employment he was knowingly signing up to. e.g. if they said in job description "must be available oncall 24/7" and that included coming to office then I can understand him having his job offer rescinded regardless of his personal circumstances. Work-Life balance is all about providing that balance outside of the expected job requirements and sometimes flexibility inside job requirements (but not always).
    • by codeButcher ( 223668 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @03:31AM (#54034821)

      The article mentions about the HR person: "She simply insisted he needed to be available at the office 24/7".

      Be that as it may, I am not even available 24/7 in my own head. When did they think he would sleep? Go to the toilet?

      • you are only hearing one side of this tale at this point. maybe he is 100% correct and she was being a megabitch and backed by pure evil or more likely it was a bit of both with him exaggerating what was actually said as really when have you ever heard of a position that requires you to be in the office 24/7? Also he was working in cryptography for BAE I seriously doubt this would even be work you would be permitted to take home and work on even if they were willing to be really nice and sympathetic.
    • by golodh ( 893453 )
      @gravewax

      Impossible indeed ... for someone like you for example who won't even read three lines into the article before hitting the keyboard.

      The article clearly states the man's SUPERVISOR was Ok with it. Not a 24/7 standby job then, Ok?

      The article illustrates why the US needs to regulate this sort of thing through legislation and your response illustrates why it's why it's not getting it.

  • Welcome to Sweden (Score:4, Informative)

    by Troed ( 102527 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @03:25AM (#54034805) Homepage Journal

    There are countries where this is not idle talk - please be welcome to Sweden. We treat dads and moms equally when it comes to parental leave, and you'd be hard pressed to find a manager who's not understanding of family emergencies. That includes the HR departments.

    /one such manager

    • by Kokuyo ( 549451 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @03:35AM (#54034827) Journal

      Even in Switzerland, employers are expected to show some flexibility not just for family emergencies but also for taking care of business. If you have to deal with banks or the government, you'll likely not be able to schedule that outside of business hours after all.

      This seems to be yet another example of how questionable the US economy operates sometimes.

      • Most of the civilized world work that way. Because we understand the necessity.

        If you burn out people, you will lose them just as they get productive. That's bad for business.

  • If you can't meet the requirements a specific job needs, the employer has a right to not hire you or to fire you. Promises of work-life balance are subjective, and it's up to the employer to decide their policy. It's up to the employee to decide whether or not they like the company. It's definitely not up to the government to decide. I feel bad for the guy, but he hasn't really been wronged. He might have a case, though, if he can show damages from thinking he had a job, and lost time looking for another jo
    • by geekmux ( 1040042 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @05:23AM (#54035051)

      If you can't meet the requirements a specific job needs, the employer has a right to not hire you or to fire you. Promises of work-life balance are subjective, and it's up to the employer to decide their policy. It's up to the employee to decide whether or not they like the company. It's definitely not up to the government to decide. I feel bad for the guy, but he hasn't really been wronged. He might have a case, though, if he can show damages from thinking he had a job, and lost time looking for another job.

      He applied for a job.

      He was hired based on his qualifications.

      He explained very clearly specific limitations upon being selected for said job, which his supervisor agreed to those terms.

      He was wronged because after ALL that, he was fired from said job because he was not afforded an opportunity to work long enough to prove the specific limitation was even going to be an issue for the employer. This might be different if he was still in the probationary period and growing demands at home started interfering with his ability to work or deliver. That was certainly not the case since he was fired within hours of all parties accepting all terms.

  • If his "His supervisor was fine with it", then why the hell did HR get involved in the first place?

    Something fishy is going on and I'm calling shenanigans.

    • by Raenex ( 947668 )

      Let's pretend you own a business, and on the first day of your new hire he tells you his wife has late-stage cancer. He says he'll put his full day in at the office, but needs his nights and weekends at home.

      Now what is the first thing that's going to cross your mind? Oh shit, this guy is going to be taking a lot of time off from work for who knows how long, and I just hired him! It's one thing to cut a long-time employee some slack, but new hires dropping bombs on their first day in is something different.

    • Something fishy is going on and I'm calling shenanigans.

      I ain't. BAe has been in the news enough with incredibly shady stuff that at this point, assuming guilt from an accusation is reasonable. Remember: corporations are not people.

  • Decency? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by lorinc ( 2470890 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @03:46AM (#54034849) Homepage Journal

    The lawsuit raises interesting questions, such as whether employment law requires corporations to have the sort of common decency we expect from individuals.

    They don't. And that's exactly why they were created in the first place: to avoid pesky human feelings from hindering business.

    • to avoid the legal liability for inevitable insane, evil things that come out of having your sole legal obligation being the pursuit of profits.

    • Re:Decency? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @05:57AM (#54035177)

      Corporations are intelligence without conscience. Yes, the people working there may have "morals", but they don't come into play because you always have someone you can blame for you "having to do" what you're doing.

      If you get laid off by your boss, he's not to blame. He gets that order from higher up. He has to fire one of you guys for the sake of the allmighty profit. And his boss, and his boss, all the way up to C-Level, can pass the blame buck upwards. C-Level isn't to blame either. The CEO has to make the company more profitable because he's responsible for it to the board. And the shareholders, let's not forget the share holders. If he allows his profit to plummet, stock prices will fall and portfolios will sell them. So the investment bankers are to blame? Hell no. They're not doing it with their own money, they have been entrusted with the money of probably hard-working people to invest that money wisely, so they can at some point go into retirement. Holding stock that doesn't perform is not in the interest of those people that trusted them with their money.

      So, in a nutshell, you have a retirement fund? Guess who just caused you to lose your job.

  • The irony is (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Chrisq ( 894406 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @04:04AM (#54034893)
    The irony is this is a British company, but in Britain he would have had the legal right to take time off to make other arrangements [nidirect.gov.uk]. (though probably not for much longer)
  • by rakslice ( 90330 ) <rakslice@nOSPaM.gmx.net> on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @04:04AM (#54034895) Homepage Journal

    My cynical guess is that this company's corporate HR is on a mission to avoid situations that would make group health insurance premiums go up; when they figure out that this new employee could be one of those, although a court would probably say they've already technically hired him, they figure they shouldroll the dice and attempt to put the pin back in. Many people would say "no harm, no foul" and go get a job somewhere else.

  • by mccalli ( 323026 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @04:11AM (#54034913) Homepage
    ....and the inflammatory sexist statement, made without any proof, at the end doesn't help. Extrapolating from the timing (we have literally nothing else to go on) it looks to me that he wasn't fired for wanting to take care of his wife. Seems more likely he was let go for either lying (or "sin of omission") at the interview and then asking for special treatment when he turned up.

    We don't know what the role was, so we don't know how likely it would be for evening/weekend work etc.. A company may well have a duty of care to its employees, but it does not have a duty of care to people who aren't its employees. Unless this was all nailed down at interview then the company didn't get what they were told they were getting. Sympathy for an employee is one thing and we don't know how the company would have responded to an existing employee suddenly having that need. What we're seeing appears to be a potential employee hiding something until actually employed and then trying to spring it on a company as an obligation.

    I am currently at a company that has been extremely generous to me in terms of time needed at home. I would not expect that same generosity if I had turned up at interview asking for the same, and I certainly wouldn't expect it if I turned up without letting them know and then saying "surprise, I'm working like this now".
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @04:34AM (#54034953)

    I work at BAE and have a disability. HR was basically worthless but my managers have been ok. They could fire me any day due to the poor 'accommodations' agreement I signed but none of them have yet. There is some flexibility in hours and there is supposed to be flexibility in work schedules, meaning you can take a 15% cut in pay and benefits to get a 15% cut in hours. I'm not sure if this is something that opened to me after being here for over a year, but I didn't know about it my first year.

    BAE Systems is a military defense contractor (and we make electronic buses...). If he was doing encryption work it was probably going to be classified and classified work can't be done remotely, but you also aren't going to be working nights or be on call unless he was specifically being hired for special duties which would have been in the job description. Since we're government contractors, we have to record our time down to every 6 minutes. Time tracking is very strict because screwing up is considered an attempt to defraud the federal government and thus a federal crime. You aren't allowed to work overtime (over 45 hours) without management approval. None of the teams I've worked on worked weekends.

    I agree it was wrong to fire him, but the discrimination line about "stereotypical male breadwinner" is complete bullshit. And why was he even talking to HR? You don't go to HR to tell them you're going to work a normal schedule. To me it sounds like the guy was hired for some extra responsibilities and then the very first thing he did was tell them he couldn't do those. My first 4 hours was setting up my desk and taking a tour of the building, not having policy meetings. During the hiring process he should have said he could only work part-time for the first couple months before transitioning to full-time. He probably would have been ok doing that. BAE is trying to hire a lot of people.

    From my experience, companies that prompt things like 'not tolerating discrimination of any kind', 'diversity', or 'XYZ encouraged to apply' are generally the ones who tolerate those things the least. It's just like 'safe spaces'. Go to a safe space and provide an opinion different from their status quo and you're aggressively kicked out. The ones who argue the loudest for something are the worse at it.

    One last thing, the USA side is "BAE Systems Inc." "BAE Systems" is the British side of the company. For the people posing .uk links, they have nothing to do with the USA side of the company.

    (Please don't fire me for this post)

  • by SharpFang ( 651121 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @05:04AM (#54035003) Homepage Journal

    If BAE systems are as honest in business with their customers and partners as they are with their employees, you're better off going elsewhere.

    Their "official statement" - it's not even "I can explain!" - it's like your wife walks in on you as you're balls deep in your mistress, then without stopping, you say "But darling, I never cheated on you and never will!" in-between thrusts. "...and I refuse to comment on what I'm doing right now and here."

  • If you think a 50 50 is balance then you're scammed. Let's ignore the fact that you only have 1 life and it encompasses everything you do it in including work. You'd be hard press to do a life life balance if you don't even have to work. Let alone this bs balance you're sold to.

    Back to strategizing the groupthink retraining matrix lol.

  • Surely if we wanted accommodation for dealing with a dying family member he should have gone with a company that touts its commitment to work/death balance?
  • It was his first day on the job!. He gets hired and THEN makes a bunch of demands. He should have been up-front about this during the application process. I'd have fired him too, even though I would have accommodated other staff who developed a similar home situation.

    It was a bad faith negotiation on his part.

  • I was very lucky (Score:4, Informative)

    by SuseLover ( 996311 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @07:12AM (#54035381)
    In December 2014 my wife was in her last weeks of life when I was informed I would be laid off in a few months. The company allowed me to spend the rest of my employment through February 2015 at home with her until her death on Christmas day 2014. I did not even have to report for work or do my job but got paid and kept our insurance.

    I don't know what I would have done if I couldn't be with her to take care of her at the time. It was very depressing to lose my job, especially at that time. But I must say they went above and beyond for me and the CEO came to the funeral even though he did not ever meet or know her.

    Fuck cancer (colon), she was 51, never drank, smoked, or did drugs and we were married for 20+ years. RIP My Love - I miss you
  • Unlikely (Score:4, Interesting)

    by 110010001000 ( 697113 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @07:22AM (#54035429) Homepage Journal
    This is clickbait BS most likely. BAE is a government contractor. They don't give a shit about little stuff like this. They just bill the government. Since the article fails to name the people involved I take this with a grain of salt. Chances are there is a lot more to this story.
  • by johnlcallaway ( 165670 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @08:02AM (#54035557)

    I ask any perspective employer or recruiter what the work from home policy is during the job interview. If it's none, I usually end the interview at some point. If it's some, we continue to talk and I base my salary request on commute time and costs. The less work from home and the longer the commute, the more I ask for.

    The only person to blame was the employee that neglected to figure things out ahead of time.

    BTW .. my current job lets me work from home 100% of the time, so don't tell me it isn't a good idea to ask.

  • In the future, everyone will be an independent contractor with no benefits of any kind. When jobs are stripped of all benefits there's absolutely no advantage to being an employee so everyone will gladly accept the new way of working (or not working).

    With the GOP in power, the social safety net will disappear completely, starting with health care.

    Enjoy it people. You voted for them.

  • by OneHundredAndTen ( 1523865 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2017 @10:41AM (#54036443)
    I have interacted with human resources people in several companies. By and large, they behaved like a bunch of bastards. It may be the case that they were just obeying the command of higher management, or that they were enjoying the power that they had over their hapless victims, or both. What does not change is the fact that they behaved like complete bastards.

Never say you know a man until you have divided an inheritance with him.

Working...