See, the people that do this shit are well trained though. Brenda didn’t demand that he work during lunch and was in fact clear that he was within his rights to not. Instead, Brenda has simply suggested that it would look better and he would conform better if he worked some unpaid time.
They know how to skirt the law. They can still go fuck themselves though, the gaslighting assholes.
If you were in a jury box and were shown just this message and a note about how he was fired two months later for “not being a team player” you’d infer the intent and vote to hold the company liable for wrongful termination.
Corpospeak keeps a “work through lunch” message from being a self-evident labor law violation even if no adverse action occurrrd. They don’t disguise intent if those later bad actions occur
Particularly in countries that allow employers to force arbitration clauses on employees. You don’t get a jury, you get an “impartial” arbitrator paid for by the company.
Doesn’t “correct this behavior” very directly imply that the current behavior (in this case, taking your full lunch break) is incorrect and therefore in need of correction, though?
It’s one thing to suggest something, but calling it a “correction” changes things, I’d think.
You’d think. Really, you would, I’m not being sarcastic.
I’ve also been around long enough to know that rational doesn’t really apply to corpos. As dumb and as frustrating as this is, I really don’t think this message would be actionable.
And that’s why you retain the email. Establishing a pattern makes the specific language less important, although in this case there’s a pretty clear implication that the employee will be punished for using their full meal break.
I’m not saying it’s airtight. But the pattern of ‘recommendations’ certainly helps. It convinced a judge in my friend’s wrongful termination case at a big box retailer.
Ianal but “voluntarily” taking a shorter lunch break is still illegal in some states. In my state, my boss would get in trouble if it could be proven that they knew I wasn’t taking the full, mandatory 30 minutes.
See, the people that do this shit are well trained though. Brenda didn’t demand that he work during lunch and was in fact clear that he was within his rights to not. Instead, Brenda has simply suggested that it would look better and he would conform better if he worked some unpaid time.
They know how to skirt the law. They can still go fuck themselves though, the gaslighting assholes.
She did also say “correct this behaviour” which is the corpo way of saying “do it or else”
Corpo language is corpo language for a reason though: it is legally safe to deploy. Intent is so very very hard to litigate.
If you were in a jury box and were shown just this message and a note about how he was fired two months later for “not being a team player” you’d infer the intent and vote to hold the company liable for wrongful termination.
Corpospeak keeps a “work through lunch” message from being a self-evident labor law violation even if no adverse action occurrrd. They don’t disguise intent if those later bad actions occur
Workplace litigation effectively never gets a jury.
Particularly in countries that allow employers to force arbitration clauses on employees. You don’t get a jury, you get an “impartial” arbitrator paid for by the company.
Yep. Frustrating.
Because the company knows it can settle to avoid the Discovery process.
Mastercardery & Visary processes too
That is a bald faced lie.
Doesn’t “correct this behavior” very directly imply that the current behavior (in this case, taking your full lunch break) is incorrect and therefore in need of correction, though?
It’s one thing to suggest something, but calling it a “correction” changes things, I’d think.
You’d think. Really, you would, I’m not being sarcastic.
I’ve also been around long enough to know that rational doesn’t really apply to corpos. As dumb and as frustrating as this is, I really don’t think this message would be actionable.
Someday an employee is going to sue you and you will lose.
I’m guessing you didn’t actually read my comment at the start here.
No that’s not a “safe” way to say this. It’s a pretty god damn clear demand
Even here in Texas, I’ve learned that “let’s correct this behavior” can be shown as evidence that you received threats of a personal improvement plan
And that’s why you retain the email. Establishing a pattern makes the specific language less important, although in this case there’s a pretty clear implication that the employee will be punished for using their full meal break.
Good luck litigating an implication though. See the “nuh uh” defense success rate.
I’m not saying it’s airtight. But the pattern of ‘recommendations’ certainly helps. It convinced a judge in my friend’s wrongful termination case at a big box retailer.
Ianal but “voluntarily” taking a shorter lunch break is still illegal in some states. In my state, my boss would get in trouble if it could be proven that they knew I wasn’t taking the full, mandatory 30 minutes.
Lucky you.
That can be annoying too, I’d rather get home to my family 15 minutes sooner. But of course Brenda isn’t offering a short lunch and leave earlier.