OV9

Broccers wrote: Fri May 22, 2020 1:25 pm

ZedLeg wrote: Fri May 22, 2020 1:20 pm It’s still a bullshit system, people should get paid for the job they’re doing not based on where they happen to live.

Its not bullshit at all. They pay extra to get the best to move to their company. A mate of mine used to work for Gremlin graphics here in Sheffield and got head hunted to work in SF - we went over for his wedding 25 years ago and it was absolutely mind blowing how much they paid to rent a house then. I would imagine its loads worse now.

So you pay the people to come and help them live... they then move somewhere cheaper so that benefit isn't needed. Its not hard to grasp.

but you’ve just said that they pay the extra to get the best. Are they not the best all of a sudden if they don’t live in the right area?

What if they buy a bigger house in a cheaper area - should they still cover that?!

TBF I guess it’s just like London weighting salaries, just put across in a more cunty wording.

They amount they are paid is based on a number of factors.

The Job they do, the level of experience they have, the qualifications they hold, the expertise they may have from previous employment and, in facebooks case, proximity to the Office.

Weekly shop time today and it was full of OAPs talking in groups, blocking aisles and generally not giving a fvck

Paying people less to do the same job because the industry hasn’t broken the economy where they live is stupid.

People entering into a contract of employment under a agreed set of terms then complaining when those agreed set of terms leave them less well off due to a decision they themselves have taken is stupid.

Has anyone from Facebook complained publicly or is this just being reported on the back of the announcement?

We need to see what the contract actually says before deciding if it’s right or not.

Would we ??

If it's not in the contract then he wouldn't be able to do it - or at the very least, we'd see different reporting "Facebook attempts to profit from a unilaterally change to contracts of employment" etc.

If it's in the contract then right or wrong doesn't come into it...

'Murica generally has weaker employee protections than Europe, but even over here they can unilaterally change a contract and if you don't accept it they can push you out it seems, so I have no trust in it being 'better' over there.

Besides, you don't pay high because it's an expensive area, it's actually an indirect link. You pay high to retain the staff because that's their market rate (ie: other employers would pay similar). It may be the market rate because 'that's the market rate for the area', but if Facebook drops pay for those who work remotely then they can just go and work for companies that don't do the same. That is, the people's market rate won't have changed because not all American tech companies treat staff this way.

I know under UK Employment Law, you can "Sign under Protest" for a mandatory change in contract terms. This must be stated formally to HR when signing and acknowledged.

I'm not sure the same applies to the signing of the primary Contract of Employment where you have more choice to accept the contract or walk away

Edit - Signing under Protest, not Duress. different thing

dinny_g wrote: Fri May 22, 2020 2:15 pm Would we ??

If it's not in the contract then he wouldn't be able to do it - or at the very least, we'd see different reporting "Facebook attempts to profit from a unilaterally change to contracts of employment" etc.

If it's in the contract then right or wrong doesn't come into it...

I think you’ve backed up my point there, you won’t know if it’s in the contract or not until you see it.

Our place are often in the news because someone has mis-interpreted a contract or employee request from the business and gone to the press about it. This instance just feels like we might not have the full picture.

I suppose you're right but. We can't be 100% sure until we get a copy of a Facebook employment contract and have a contract lawyer look over it.

But that isn't going to happen so I guess we'll just have to rely on the reporting, which so far, is pretty clear to me.

But I'll happily change my view if more information comes to light.

Oh hey, Priti Patel, being incredibly on the ball, has announced a 14 day quarantine on international arrivals.


Nice....nice timing I guess?

I smell some bullshit. BBC news article on how safe takeaways and supermarket deliveries are - It claims covid cannot he spread by food packaging and there is no evidence of this happening. So if someone infected touches a door handle or cardboard box or metal or plastic it will be infected but if it’s food packaging it won’t be? What the actual fuck!!

Yes, it's BS. I read the same article. It _can_ be spread via packaging, so you need to wash your hands any everything after touching it and before eating.

Been speaking to work today, furlough ending and back to work 22nd June

jamcg wrote: Fri May 22, 2020 10:06 pm Been speaking to work today, furlough ending and back to work 22nd June

My bro says similar - although that's provisional, at the moment.

And chances of Dominic Cummings being fired or resigning?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52779356

Less than zero, I'd guess.

JonMad wrote: Fri May 22, 2020 10:29 pm And chances of Dominic Cummings being fired or resigning?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52779356

Less than zero, I'd guess.

You can't just sack the actual ruler of the country, you stupid cunt.

The north’s always complaining the south gives them fuck all. Do us a favour Dom old chap and go give them something