this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2024
133 points (92.9% liked)
Antiwork
8017 readers
1 users here now
-
We're trying to reduce the numbers of hours a person has to work.
-
We talk about the end of paid work being mandatory for survival.
Partnerships:
- Matrix/Element chatroom
- Discord (channel: #antiwork)
- IRC: #antiwork on IRCNow.org (i.e., connect to ircs://irc.ircnow.org and
/join #antiwork) - Your facebook group link here
- Your x link here
- lemmy.ca/c/antiwork
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Well Fargo fired people for working a second job ON COMPANY TIME, USING COMPANY RESOURCES AND COMPUTERS.
THIS IS FRAUD.
They abso-fucking-lutely deserved this. Don't get behind this story and act like it's employers being shitty when it was employees faking working their main job using mouse/keyboard idlers to work a second job during time they were being paid by the first job for, using resources provided by the first job.
Work 2 jobs separately? Big whoop. Being paid for your time to do a job and you do a completely different job in that time using your employers resources? Hell, be glad they didn't sue you.
Get behind real issues, not this. This just makes you look like the reddit anti work mod who got interviewed and complained that they couldn't support themselves as a dog walker for 2 hours a week. It makes YOU look unreasonable.
it literally says they were fired for using a mouse jiggler.
However, I live in a so-called right-to-work state, which means my employer can do whatever the fuck they like - but the flip side is - so can I.
The contract I signed doesn't mention which or how many hours I work, just that I don't disclose privileged information to competitors.
Right to work laws have nothing to do with at-will employment, which it what you're describing. Right to work laws prevent unions from collecting dues from non-union members. That's all.
Before anyone jumps on and says right to work laws prevent union shops from requiring membership in a union as a condition of employment, that was the Taft-Hartley act of 1947.
ok fair, I meant - via synecdoche - the cluster of (or lack of) employment laws that make things flexible for employers works both ways.
It is very different in countries with strict employment laws
Sorry, I'm usually a bit more tactful! I'm not trying to criticize, just inform.
Lmao that's not how "right to work" works. That's how having a contract works lmao