Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Tuesday July 20 2021, @04:43PM   Printer-friendly

Apple employees threaten to quit as company takes hard line stance on remote work:

Apple employees claim the company is not budging on plans to institute a hybrid work model for corporate workers and is in some cases denying work-from-home exceptions, including one accommodation covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act.

In June, Apple announced a hybrid work schedule that will see employees return to the office for three days a week starting in September, a shift toward normal corporate operations after the pandemic forced a lengthy work-from-home period. Days later, participants of what is assumed to be the same remote work advocacy Slack channel cited by The Verge asked more flexibility, saying that working from home brings a number of benefits including greater diversity and inclusion in retention and hiring, tearing down previously existing communication barriers, better work life balance, better integration of existing remote / location-flexible workers, and reduced spread of pathogens.

That request was flatly denied. In a video to employees late last month, SVP of retail and people Deirdre O'Brien toed the company line on remote work policies, saying, "We believe that in-person collaboration is essential to our culture and our future. If we take a moment to reflect on our unbelievable product launches this past year, the products and the launch execution were built upon the base of years of work that we did when we were all together in-person."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by looorg on Tuesday July 20 2021, @10:57PM (2 children)

    by looorg (578) on Tuesday July 20 2021, @10:57PM (#1158487)

    This is one of those things that I don't quite understand either. Sure I understand that if you live in the big cool city you need to cover rent somehow and so the pay sort of have to be able to cover it. At the same time it's a bit a choice if I want to live in luxury or if I'm ok with a normal or small flat and that shouldn't change my pay (or value) to the company. So from their perspective I assume they don't want to pay NYC, SF or Cupertino (San Jose?) salaries for someone that lives in Podunk, whatever. Even tho it shouldn't change their value to the company. But apparently it does. After all if I could 100% remote work I could take my big city salary and then do my work from a bar in Bangkok.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Opportunist on Wednesday July 21 2021, @06:41AM

    by Opportunist (5545) on Wednesday July 21 2021, @06:41AM (#1158671)

    I guess that's only ok when the corporation does it. It's called "outsourcing" in that case.

    If you cut costs by moving abroad, it sure gets another title. Something along the lines of "tax dodging" or something.

  • (Score: 2) by slinches on Wednesday July 21 2021, @03:48PM

    by slinches (5049) on Wednesday July 21 2021, @03:48PM (#1158754)

    I understand it. It's because wages are traditionally set by the local market and people who live in lower cost areas typically have fewer options of employers and are more often willing to accept lower pay due to those factors. Employers know this and set their pay scales accordingly. Although, if the recent expansion in remote work sticks around it will definitely cause some of those market forces to shift.