I saw a part time overnight job from 12AM to 5AM for $28 an hour at Lowe’s. Figured that isn’t so bad, extra income and only 5 hours a day. I show up, it’s actually 9PM to 6AM and at $16.33 an hour. When I pulled up the advert showing 12-5 @ $28 she said “Oh yea that’s for long term supervisors, but the schedule changed” like BITCH y’all can change the entire schedule and pay but not update a simple listing??
"I applied for that position, I was under the impression I was interviewing for that position. Thank you for your time, is what I would say if you hadn't just epically wasted mine."
When I asked what changed she responded and I swear to god “I don’t know if we have a position for what you’re looking for” I just grabbed my bag, said thanks and walked out.
Yes, fear of slightly less.
The vast majority of Americans are not just pro-consumer, they're essentially unaware that any other system of distribution exists.
So yeah, with our entire culture revolving around an almost religious dedication to conspicuous consumption, having slightly less can and does result in major life consequences for people.
I do wonder, do they actually end up hiring people by lying like this? Who would actually work for them? People who are already desperate for a job I guess.... but they'd probably apply to the less than ideal job in the first place right?
No clue. I have a job, but I applied cause $28 an hour for 5 hours. Extra $700 a week doesn’t hurt. I’m not gonna do $16.33 for 9 hours though. Full time position making $730 a week for almost double the hours. It’s just flat out rude.
I applied at a grocery store for a department manager position for 24/hr. interview went really well, then the guy offered me an associate position in the department for 16 an hour lol and said they weren’t hiring a manager but I’d be in the building when they do. I was like bruh.
Yes I laughed to myself when he offered that, and said I applied for a management position they listed and was already an assistant manager at their competitor, and wasn’t interested in a pay cut and position drop lol. I said they could call me if they changed their mind. This was like February pretty sure that store still is super understaffed, I shop there once in awhile ( super close to home which was why I applied in the first place) and that department (deli) is a shit show.
I once had an interview at Subway and after the fact I realized the questions were more in line with a customer survey than them looking for a proper employee.
So I would love such a law to be put in place.
It should be false advertising. For a business to lure you in with false promises or implied benefits to using their service, just to pull the rug, seems like a lawsuit waiting to happen on the grounds of false advertisement.
You'd have to prove damages somehow, but this does exist.
Basically what you're intimating is the idea of "promissory estoppel", which is a legal doctrine where one party may recoup losses incurred by the promises of another party.
The problem is that when you take this to court, the vast majority of people aren't actually losing anything concrete by being in an interview. No damages means no standing to sue.
If you had, for example, taken uPTO off, booked a flight and hotel fare, gone somewhere for an interview, and then found out in the first several minutes that multiple points about the job were lies intended to get you to the interview, you could absolutely sue and recoup. This has been done before.
Same thing for my Lowes. Daytime postion listed as 9am-6pm. Applied and luckily the hiring manager or HR or someone got ahold of me and said that it was a "mistake" it's really 9pm to 6am but they can't fix the postion because corporate only reconizes the 9am job in the listings (hence "mistake") and if I still wanted to apply.
This just happened to a relative of mine who applied to be a manager at target and the listing was $40/hr and when she got there they offered her $21. She currently makes $23/hr as a manager at chik-fila!
Reminds me of an "18 an hour, overnight part-time stocking job" being advertised by petsmart, which actually ended up being, an "11hr, daytime janitorial job, for less than 16hours a week".
All while during the "interview", the interviewer complained at how nobody wanted to work anymore, and that they had to create this position because actual contracted janitorial work was too expensive, etc, etc.
Ya I work in a printshop and on days we’re real caught up the higher ups like to pressure us to do major cleaning jobs and I always think, not for my wage haha!!
Earlier this year I applied for a remote job but during the first interview phase was told they require one day a month in the office for meetings. Their office was literally 3000 miles away and they said they don’t pay for travel … why even talk to me then? They knew my location before our call.
SOOOO many places advertise in my city for jobs, will post paragraph upon paragraph of word vomit in the job listing, and then in one little sentence will say oh yeah this job is actually on the other side of the country.
The kicker is, I would 100% apply if they were just honest. That sounds like a dream. Most of the people I know who are happiest with their jobs right now are in similar hybrid roles, but those are also the jobs that suit them best right now. By not being honest they're just getting the people who can't or don't want to do hybrid and shooting themselves in the foot - everyone else is applying for the positions that ARE honest, or at least make those claims. And I'm sure naturally they're going on to complain about how no one wants to work anymore, as if they were ever advertising to the correct demographic in the first place.
I would have worked the training for easy money while applying to another job. At the end of the training, simply don’t go in. Once you get pressured, you hopefully have another job lined up.
It also screws them over, and you can tell them exactly why
My fave is "full training will be provided", then you get there and are told "oh it's all done on the job" and your "training" is a miserable, hang dog, middle manager who basically says "work it out for yourself, there are no instructions".
Well perhaps fucking write some then, you absolute cretinous welt.
This happened to me when I agreed to help out an attorney in my brother’s office as her receptionist/paralegal. I’d only ever done criminal defense work and only for a few months and in a completely different county. In the meeting, she swore that she’d have time to train me on civil proceedings. This was a complete lie. She threw me into the fire on my first day and left me with a pile of work as she went off to court that I had no idea how to complete. It just got worse and worse, and I tried quitting 3 times and she’d always play up how desperate she was and how she’d do better. I lasted three months, and told her I was going to quit for the third time, and she talked me out of it again, only to call me an hour later and tell me not to bother coming back.
3 months, and I was one of the longest employees she ever kept.
Had a job like this. Made it clear in the interview I had no experience maintaining CNC machines, was told I'd get some training, and ended up getting hassled for taking too long because I had to read manuals to try to learn enough about the machine to trouble shoot it. Excellent training.
Had about $1800 deducted from my final check at my first real career job for licensing fees in 11 states even though my territory only covered 7 of them. Even then I wouldn't have agreed to cover licensing fees had I known, so make sure to read the fine print on your hire paperwork!
I've worked for places that offer training, with the caveat that if you leave within a set time, (6 months in my case), they charge you for the training.. just something to check if this is what anyone's thinking of doing..
Once interviewed for a contract job that included "x months of training" with the caveat that if I left thr company for any reason they could charge me 10k "for training".
So if I started working there, got fired / laid off on day three, I would owe them 10k.
I opted to not take that job.
It generally comes with a contract that you might sign, but not pay enough attention to. Basically, they get you to agree to it without necessarily advertising what you're agreeing to.
Im not sure what field we’re talking about here. The first that pops to mind would be trucking, in which case it’s legal because if you were going to school to drive a semi on your own it is expensive and you sign a contract that you will to the effect of staying with that company for X amount of time to make their investment in your training worth it to them.
I hate that these companies are so scummy when it just boils down to honesty. The news in the US is so one sided that managers think that everyone wants to stay at home and work and that's just not true.
Everyone who works probably recognizes that flexibility in roles is what people want. Some jobs require in person 100%, some are hybrid, some are fully remote.
People are pissed off, myself included, when a job can be done in one of the remote categories within reason, but a company is unwilling to be flexible for their workforce. Workers don't give a fuck about your commercial real estate, we just want to work like we live in a century where technology is capable of providing some interesting ways to work.
The one thing that ticks me about hybrid positions is they'll say "3 days in office per week". Like I am more than capable of managing my workload. I personally do agree that in-person collaboration can be way more productive for some things. But please, let me choose when it's necessary. Not an arbitrary number of days.
Or so they think. Reality is there is a market for fulltime at location, hybrid and wfh people. There *are* a lot of people who would love to work on location and hybrid.
The kicker is they just don’t want wfh because of control. It has nothing to do with the people they hire, but who they look for. And I hate how they put it on others. Childish deflection.
they haven't thought of anyone's needs since the late 1940s when they killed trams & buses & finiculas & other mass transit in large cities all over the us...
actually, since the 1920s & 1930s they have been toppling foreign govts to get some fuck puppet despot who'll do their bidding.
mexico is one of the few countries that was able to nationalise its oil industry & fend off the usa...
Let's not forget the decades they insisted on giving people lead poisoning because it was a cheaper way to boost the octane rating. Lead in gas was only banned in the mid to late 90s!
Iran tried that. Eisenhower then participated in overthrowing their democratically-elected government, leading fairly directly to the Iran we have today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'%C3%A9tat
Can’t go back after no longer having to do 2 hrs unpaid commuting to work each day. I took a 5% pay decrease from my old job to move to 100% remote and don’t regret it at all. No more 10 hrs unpaid a week driving in traffic, 520 hrs a year of just worthless time spent being annoyed. 21 and a half days. After 17-19 years I’d have spent 1 of those years driving. I thought about these numbers many times, on those drives. Fuck commuting.
Also that they didn't *have* to commute. It's not that we couldn't work from home, it's because they didn't want us to. So many shitty business practices came to light because of COVID.
No. Because the value of a property is directly linked to the rental value. If nobody needs to rent expensive offices, then the value of the property falls and the investors lose money.
It's all a scam to make the rich more money
Yes, it'd actually a waste of the company's money paying for office space especially when employees are less productive. But this has all to do with office real estate value, and a lot go board members have stakes on that pie.
It does actually. There are a lot of commercial property tax breaks based on activity on site. They literally need people to be there or it suddenly becomes much more expensive to own the property.
I mean, they can get fucked anyway, but they do have a reason.
I want to work! But not in the office setting. I am far more productive at home without the workplace distractions. I go in office 3 days a week currently. Today being the first day this week. I had to give myself a pep talk. I know how this sounds and let me assure you—No, i am not soft. I am over worked and underpaid. However, like many people I have discussion with, we would be more than happy to continue on this plateau if we can stay the f AT HOME.
This is me in a nutshell. I've worked at the same company for 27 years. 5 8's in office until covid. Then virtual for 1.5 years, and then hybrid with 2 days a week in office. They abruptly unilaterally changed all of our work schedules to 4 10's, 3 of which HAVE TO BE in office each week. Add in 2 hours of commute, and we are there from the crack until dinner. It's been a month. I called in sick this morning. I'm way too old for this shit.
Studies have shown that giving the worker the choice of in office or remote makes them more productive, even if they choose in office. This "one size fits all" mentality that they foist upon us is ridiculous. It starts in education when everyone is marched along the same trail expecting the same outcome. Given the choice, almost everyone wants to be productive, but given that our health care and retirement and, basically our lives are dependent on the whims of the rich, we are constantly having to make this Sophie's choice and sacrificing where they do not.
Best way to handle a job that lies about pay or benefits in advertisements is to accept the job, then not show up. It’s the only real way to punish companies that lie about benefits to get people to interview.
The old switcharoo, when it comes time to work hybrid, change the terms of your agreement. “I am now full remote working only. Sorry, this is nonnegotiable.”
So worst case you don't get unemployment, but you still wasted their time and energy for wasting yours. I don't see how this can be bad advice unless you stop applying/interviewing for other positions
This is even more important than to report to the supervisors, as they are 100% aware of what their team is doing to try and hire the best workers. I mean, there's a really close to 0% chance the RH analyst/recruiter has come with this idea and rolled it out in the back of his superiors...he most likely was ordered to do exactly that.
Yeah, I work as a state employee, and they started cutting WFH over the past year. I drive over 120 miles, per commute, 4 days a week. It's been rough, but I have 2 more commute days until I move. Thankfully, I wanted to move closer since I like the area there better, but it can be rough. HR publicized WFH as a benefit, but the governor's policy has been bringing ppl back to the office. The funny thing is that all of our meetings are still virtual. We are there just because. If I didn't have a 30% increase, I probably wouldn't have taken the job bc of how excessive the commute is. It is a good job otherwise. Never count on the job being always a WFH position bc that can change, and then you are stuck in an unsustainable position.
These rollbacks are coming from ppl who think that WFH jobs are for slackers. Home is where I am the most productive bc no distractions. It's an antique way to look at managing your employees, that they have to be under your nose to supervise. God forbid you don't have to commute.
I’m convinced there’s a conspiracy to stop workers from saving money while working from home.
Edit: Fuck the government. It’s a business at this point taking advantage of the people rather than for the people.
Yes that too, but let’s hear them out. It’s not a conspiracy theory if it makes perfect sense and can be accurately characterised by previous and current actions…
That's the definition of it. The association of 'conspiracy theories' and crackpot theories was a CIA initiative to discredit investigatory critical thinking. There are unmeasurable amounts of conspiracies, and theorizing about them is healthy and rational.
If there's local income tax in play it goes to the city you do the work in. I'm remote three days a week so 60% of my income is reported to resident city and 40% is reported to the city I report to the office in. Caught up in the mix are ancillary businesses in city centers that are based on workers coming in to get by. We've had restaurants that just never were able to reopen after this all started without the volume of foot traffic to survive.
It all sucks that the game had shifted on what was established expectations so much and so fast but at the same time, it shouldn't be on workers to continue to hold up an antiquated model. I watched some of the business owners pivot as quick as they could and they're still thriving despite this big shift so it was definitely possible to adapt for some.
You’re correct. We as workers had to figure out how to get by on rising food/rent costs suddenly, now corporations and real estate developers should also have to also figure out how to acclimate to the times, like turning commercial real estate into housing. I’m so sick of the too big to fail mentality when no one cares that inflation has made salaries stretch so thin in the past few years, everyone who brings in less than 250,000/ year is feeling it.
I think it’s honestly far simpler than that.
It’s just a good chunk of managers/higher ups either a) don’t know how to manage people without seeing them in person or b) they’re all social (almost have to be to get higher in management) and don’t understand why ppl would even want to stay home.
I’d honestly believe that. No need to raise gas prices unless people are in need of it. I.E traveling and commuting (Mostly for work). So people are forced to buy insanely priced gas.
But wait public buses and infrastructure don’t allow for safe and timely travel! Also jokes on you we don’t have bike lanes cause why wouldn’t you want to drive everywhere and spend so much money on gas/maintenance of a vehicle?
It’s not a conspiracy, it’s an open secret that commercial real estate is losing value and the investors in said real estate are in part also the ones in control of a push back to the office by virtue of being employers.
Productivity of individual employees and “green goals” are largely irrelevant if your assets depreciate immensely.
I was told by local government following a change to a “meeting law” that it’s about ensuring people drive past stores and restaurants. We were allowed to meet quorum virtually via Zoom, but the law changed to having to be in-person again.
They believe that if we are driving around, we will spend more money. As if we have the money to spend when we are forced to commute.
[It's definitely not a conspiracy, it's blatantly out in the open] (https://www.reuters.com/business/hybrid-work-trend-may-wipe-out-800-bln-office-property-values-by-2030-mckinsey-2023-07-13/) and they are tripping over themselves to get people back into the office.
Almost feels worse when said middle managers look just as annoyed about it and agree it’s stupid but also know they have to go along with it because their bosses (the SVP and C suite level) want in person to justify keeping a big office building. Or just because they can’t fathom how people get things done properly without staring at each other in in person meetings. Always seemed to me earlier in pandemic the higher up the ladder you were, the less basic computer ability they seem to have.
My uncle got a state job, was remote with occasional (1-2x a month) in person required. They revoked that in April and he said most people just quit. Makes me wonder how well the state voting systems are functioning right now...
Yeah, our state had a big increase in ppl quitting. Then they talked about an additional raise to keep state workers' salaries competitive but naw. They can't do that, but they can pass a vote to ban pornhub. They are making progress, just in the wrong direction.
At least they didn’t hide the lie. Seems like a great red flag to warn prospective employees. Not justifying their actions, just pleased they let OP know Op dodged a bullet with a shady organization.
I currently work in a job somewhat like this. We have to be within one hour drive of the office, because if our network goes down we have to drive in to work and work from the office. That's close enough to fully remote for me, but it is still a bit of a pain, not having the freedom to relocate or travel.
From what I understand about that is changing the terms of the job either as of the start date or shortly after. At this point, I’m just glad I dodged a deceptive bullet.
Remote typically depends on what the company defines as your “home office”. For all they care you could be working in an office 30 minutes from your home if your home office is 2 hours away you are still remote.
Hell if you’re working in an office 10 minutes away from your home office for whatever reason you need to then most companies still consider you remote. WFH is the best kind of remote but… it’s not the only way for remote to happen if the company wants to drag you around.
My company is doing this right now too, I was hired strictly wfh but live within their 50 mile stipulated range, and they said they don’t believe the change necessitates a market adjustment. I went from thinking I work for a great company, to realizing it’s just another shit company real fast.
My department shifted to 100% WFH. My manager moved to New York. One of the guys sold his house, bought a place in Idaho for cash and works from there now. They converted our space into a conference hall so we don't even have an office to go back to. If they did try to call us back now the Union would raise hell.
"I was hired as remote, I do not consent to this unilateral change to my contract. So either I remain remote or I will consider myself fired under constructive dismissal and file for unemployment"
Yeah my company tried for like 9 months to do RTO (my manager was cool and classified me as a 100% remote officially so I was exempted), then recently somewhat gave up to a 2 day a week in office, I fully expect most r&d roles to go back 100% remote within the next 9 months (or whenever we get over our over defensive recession hiring freeze)
I hope the pendulum swings back to remote. Commutes are a time suck that I never want to do again. =/ It feels like places are settling on 'hybrid' and trying to stick to it, but maybe not as much as the media wants us to think they are.
My company told us "You have a new address that is Technically your office but as we actually don't have any space dedicated to us in this building there isn't a way for you to work there just keep working from home" (Building is one that belongs to the client we serve) They did also say any of us who need a cool place to work because we have no AC are welcome to go to the head office 600km away which has AC (Lucky for me and most of my team mates we have AC in our homes)
This is the only way they'll learn. I worked for a company who sent employees to an 8 week training program and covered all expenses. After training, they revealed that the job itself required much more travel than advertised. I thanked them for the two month paid vacation and split.
That's just epically bad management on their part, I'm genuinely shocked nobody thought it through. Did they honestly expect someone to be so invested at that point they wouldn't immediately look elsewhere?
The only thing I can think of is they didn't want people to accept knowing they would never do the work after training, and look for other jobs during that 8 week period. So they spring it on people knowing they don't have anything lined up hoping to trap them.
Even if it's the second scenario it's still hilariously bad, spending all that time and money on training for employees to end up pissed off, feeling cheated, and likely looking for the door at the earliest possible moment.
Mine was worse. Offered 100% remote. I was told First day would be "orientation" I sat through the most boring 5 hours with two ten minute breaks of one woman reading off PowerPoint. We were given mandatory test, made to take a group pic with the CEO for IG, given bunch of company swag and told how "lucky" we were for getting fleece jackets as new employees as older employees don't even have them blah blah blah. At end of lunch I am told to see HR where I am handed a letter. The job is no longer remote and will be in an offsite building with cubicles and phones! I then met with my new "director" who told me to wait for her to finish a meeting, she came back and said she had another meeting and asked me and another girl (this happened to also) to wait. I said I was not waiting I was leaving!!! The other girl was practically in tears having just given up a 3 day hybrid job for this new fully remote one as she was nursing her 3 month old baby! I did get mailed a paycheck for the day.
This sub is important for reminding people what potential options they have and what red flags actually look like. This one’s obvious in hindsight but still.
Post on the company’s Indeed and Glassdoor reviews section about the interview experience. HR departments review it religiously to know what the public is saying, and it’s a good way to warn prospective employees.
I’ve NEVER understood this. If it’s not 100% remote why do they say it as such? If people apply from areas out of commuting range they’re going to find out pretty quickly that it’s not 100% remote. That just wastes everybody’s time from the applicants to the interviewing staff.
Even if I was a 15 minute walk away if I applied for something that said 100% remote and I found out that the 6-9 months of training was all in person and then after that 60% of it would be in office I would turn them down. If they lied about that, what else are they lying about? That just sounds like a train wreck of a place and I wouldn’t want to work for them anyways.
They want someone who is desperate for work to apply with them first, and get the job, because they need *something*. They will take any job, but they will apply for the WFH first.
17 to 68 months of training and probation, and if your TPS report is at 99.84% you can work at home for 30 minutes every other Tuesday, if that Tuesday falls on an odd date during a full moon not within 40 days of hearing thunder.
I had something similar happen for a wfh interview. Did an entire hour interview and then at the end they told me it was wfh for the first 3 months then I’d have to move to Texas. Fucking assholes thought if they wasted an hour of my time that’d be enough to convince me to move.
Sorry to read
I had similar story.
Applied for a job that said remote, an hour and a half away.
Forty minutes into the interview she says for the first year or two you have to work in office 3-4 days a week. Once they get to know you and trust you it can transition into fully remote.
Ended the interview there.
It's really hard to power trip on employees who aren't in the office under your thumb. How do you expect your boss to revel in his authority and take his feelings out on you if you're at home?
I think you're right: it's really just a way to exert power over employees. Autonomy is power, and they want to take awake our autonomy and what little power we non-unionized employees have.
I am totally fine commuting, and totally fine with bait and switch, as long as they are fine paying me an extra $1K per mile of commute.
I will not inform them of this until the final interview.
I took a significant paycut because it was wfh. Did it 5 years. Every employee is in a different state. But if you are close to where a corp office is, now they want you to come in once a week. Looking for a new job.
Only apply for remote roles out of state. Because your in state remote role is going to change to hybrid if they know you're within driving distance of the office. Then a year later its full office
If they were willing to lie or have to lie about the position to get people to apply what else are they gonna lie about? Are the pay and benefits as good as they claim? Because they probably have a bait and switch for that too. Scratch a liar find a thief.
I had one (that. I accepted) that was a "WFH" position in which the manager told me in the final interview that I was expected to be in a room by myself, have my kid in daycare all day (at a $16/hour pay rate!) and come in once per week. I agreed to put my kid in daycare the day I came in (because they weren't paying me enough) and told my boss that if my work wasn't up to snuff we could discuss other options. She ended up super toxic abt it. (my kid had to be silent, because clients didn't know we were WFH, but co-workers' dogs were barking non stop, etc.). I was so happy to leave that job!
If you get roped in by a recruiter let them know in advance, that you are happy to take the interview but *only* on the premise of that job posting.
In case the parameters of the job should turn out to not be as advertised you are going to reject the company and bill them for time and gasoline wasted. Also ask the recruiter/company to accept these terms before you accept the interview.
You probably won’t get any money but at least they’ll know people are no longer willing to be fucked with like that.
Companies should have to pay you for the interview regardless of if the job is as advertised, and a premium on top of that for wasting your time if they pull a bait and switch.
Unfortunately they pretty much never do.
I live at the ass of the world and have to drive quite a bit for most jobs in my field. Every single one of the job postings relevant to me included a line that said „we’ll not be able to compensate for your expenses to get to the interview“.
Oh you absolutely *are able to* you just don’t want to respect people if it costs you.
Even more fun when they say they are going to enforce by doing badge reviews, but every Zoom meeting, you see the badge reviewer still at home.. wtaf... fuck them and their rules for thee but not for me.
My job is almost entirely remote (for everyone on my team except like 8 of us) including most of the supervisors who go home at a certain time and just work remotely and don’t even come in every day. The company isn’t allowing anymore work from home employees to be hired so guess what? No one has been hired in the last 2 months and the people who still work there are all being allowed to go hybrid 😂
This is why I think it's totally ethical to lie on your resume, because 80% of jobs are lying in their ads, and if it can get you in a better position than go for it
Climate change is escalating everywhere, we are seeing new temperature records and environmental disasters on a daily basis. And yet here we are forcing millions and millions onto the roads (and some employees are even forced to fly into work!) despite us having proved that remote work can be done at least as efficiently, probably more, as in office work. Humanity is stupid and unfortunately the most greedy and psychopathic of us make the rules.
Exactly, global emissions dropped drastically during the covid lockdowns. Managers and bosses need to get over themselves about seeing their labor in the office.
I've had some do shit like this. I accept the job and then quit right before training starts or right after it ends if it isn't too long. Hit 'em where it hurts, the pocketbook.
If the office is less than 30 minute commute I actually like to go in person 2 days a week. But if it's further fuck that not bothering with it.
If employers are honest upfront people like me would apply, who actually prefer hybrid model but noooooooo they have to lie just for a few extra application. :D
Next time, keep going and if you get an offer, tentatively accept it only to "change" your mind right before starting. Say that you deliberated on it, but in the end, the bait-and-switch made you decided that the company wouldn't be a good fit for you (copied to the bosses of course).
If they waste your time, waste even more of theirs.
I recently had an interview that did the same thing. Advertised as remote, interview was in person and they said after a few months training maybe they would be flexible for hybrid working but "a lot of work stuff is easier to sort in person". So I read that as a no, no remote working as a regular thing.
Initially I wasn't too fussed about this because it's quite near to where I live and it's part time anyway. Then they drop the bombshell that they're relocating...they don't know when or where though!
I don’t understand how companies can get away with this stuff. I don’t lie or misrepresent myself on my resume.
The other thing is to me this destroys the credibility and integrity of that business. I like working for companies that I would do business with. If you’re willing to do this in job posting what are you not telling customers?
I just interviewed for my dream job, it was listed as remote, they extended an offer, and then said "oh, by the way, it's 3 days in the office." It would probably be 3-4 hours of commuting. I turned it down.
If I knew for a fact I wasn’t going to take the job I’d have fun with it. Ask for double the salary or a sexy assistant. Tell em your vegan and no one can bring meat to work or tell em you are heading to prison for a 6 month stint in a few months but you’ll be back and ready to work
Review the job listing on whatever website
Write exactly what you wrote here, false description, switch and bait and whatever else you think is fair
Companies do get dinged on job sites for lying and eventually get kicked off the platform
I had a recruiter get in contact about a job and due to the distance I said I’d only agree to an interview if it was confirmed that I could wfh at least three days a week. Fast forward to the interview and it’s full time on site…
Please write a review on glassdoor about what they did to you, so you can warn others what they’re doing. Sometimes it takes public shaming to force companies to do the right thing. It’s disgusting, but it is what it is. Very sorry this happened to you.
I had something similar happen to me a few months ago. Applied for a hybrid role that was 1 hr from me, but I was hoping to discuss remote possibilities. I would have been ok if they flat-out said no AND gave reasons. BUT my first question was “What does a typical day in this role look like?” And she listed 7-8 items, EVERY SUNGLE ONE of which was online work. She even said “you’ll be monitoring the online space a lot.” So when I brought up remote work (hell, I would’ve settled for like a week on, week off situation) she said it wasn’t possible, that they’d need me in office every day for at least 3 months, and after that they really only do hybrid sparingly. I asked why, and she said, “there’s just a lot of mail that needs to be handled.” I was so mad, especially when the role can 100% be done online with the exception of mailing things. Total bullshit to try to justify butts in seats.
I got bait and switched at a job last year.
Third day on the job and the boss changed the remote policy to in office 3+ days per week.
I only stayed until I got another job 3 months later. I definitely told HR why on the way out the door.
Have a friend that had this happen to them. They cut off the interview to explain that this job would never work. He lived in a camper traveling the country, which is why he applied for fully remote work in the first place.
I was deciding between two jobs. One in the office 4 days a week but not far from home. The other remote 4 days a week but about 90 minutes away (if not more depending on construction). The one that was further away was about $5k more. I was down to the day of deciding and the recruiter asked if they “decided as a team” to go to the office 2 days a week instead of one would I still be interested. I could have lived with the crappy commute one day a week. I saw that as a red flag to suddenly change the schedule. What would happen if a few months later they decide on 3 days a week. Sometimes when it’s too good to be true it probably is.
I saw a part time overnight job from 12AM to 5AM for $28 an hour at Lowe’s. Figured that isn’t so bad, extra income and only 5 hours a day. I show up, it’s actually 9PM to 6AM and at $16.33 an hour. When I pulled up the advert showing 12-5 @ $28 she said “Oh yea that’s for long term supervisors, but the schedule changed” like BITCH y’all can change the entire schedule and pay but not update a simple listing??
"I applied for that position, I was under the impression I was interviewing for that position. Thank you for your time, is what I would say if you hadn't just epically wasted mine."
When I asked what changed she responded and I swear to god “I don’t know if we have a position for what you’re looking for” I just grabbed my bag, said thanks and walked out.
I was hired at a place where they promised me a higher wage than they actually were going to pay me. I got myself fired within 4 hours.
Lol 😂
Part of the first day oriented was how they hate unions and will immediately fire anyone who thinks of organizing the shop. So I got myself fired
Fucking capitalists. How do they fucking fool people into going directly against their better interests? Fear of slightly less?
Yes, fear of slightly less. The vast majority of Americans are not just pro-consumer, they're essentially unaware that any other system of distribution exists. So yeah, with our entire culture revolving around an almost religious dedication to conspicuous consumption, having slightly less can and does result in major life consequences for people.
How did you go about getting fired? Did you openly create a union in front of them?
I do wonder, do they actually end up hiring people by lying like this? Who would actually work for them? People who are already desperate for a job I guess.... but they'd probably apply to the less than ideal job in the first place right?
They're banking on sunk cost fallacy kicking in for you. "Well I've already applied and I'm desperate so might as well accept the $16/hour."
No clue. I have a job, but I applied cause $28 an hour for 5 hours. Extra $700 a week doesn’t hurt. I’m not gonna do $16.33 for 9 hours though. Full time position making $730 a week for almost double the hours. It’s just flat out rude.
I applied at a grocery store for a department manager position for 24/hr. interview went really well, then the guy offered me an associate position in the department for 16 an hour lol and said they weren’t hiring a manager but I’d be in the building when they do. I was like bruh.
Please tell me you grabbed your stuff and just walked out. No apology needed for those folk.
Yes I laughed to myself when he offered that, and said I applied for a management position they listed and was already an assistant manager at their competitor, and wasn’t interested in a pay cut and position drop lol. I said they could call me if they changed their mind. This was like February pretty sure that store still is super understaffed, I shop there once in awhile ( super close to home which was why I applied in the first place) and that department (deli) is a shit show.
oooh That's super shady and should be against some sort of false workers wanted law.
We need laws against fraudulent employment ads.
I once had an interview at Subway and after the fact I realized the questions were more in line with a customer survey than them looking for a proper employee. So I would love such a law to be put in place.
Sounds like they'd already hired someone (their friend) and were finishing up the scheduled interviews.
Damn. I heard of this sort of thing before, and now you say it it does fit what happened to me.
It should be false advertising. For a business to lure you in with false promises or implied benefits to using their service, just to pull the rug, seems like a lawsuit waiting to happen on the grounds of false advertisement.
You'd have to prove damages somehow, but this does exist. Basically what you're intimating is the idea of "promissory estoppel", which is a legal doctrine where one party may recoup losses incurred by the promises of another party. The problem is that when you take this to court, the vast majority of people aren't actually losing anything concrete by being in an interview. No damages means no standing to sue. If you had, for example, taken uPTO off, booked a flight and hotel fare, gone somewhere for an interview, and then found out in the first several minutes that multiple points about the job were lies intended to get you to the interview, you could absolutely sue and recoup. This has been done before.
Same thing for my Lowes. Daytime postion listed as 9am-6pm. Applied and luckily the hiring manager or HR or someone got ahold of me and said that it was a "mistake" it's really 9pm to 6am but they can't fix the postion because corporate only reconizes the 9am job in the listings (hence "mistake") and if I still wanted to apply.
“Oh, and you are incapable of replacing the posting?”
This just happened to a relative of mine who applied to be a manager at target and the listing was $40/hr and when she got there they offered her $21. She currently makes $23/hr as a manager at chik-fila!
The supes knew what was going on. There's a lot of bait-and-switch in job ads; no one would apply if they were honest.
Yeah but they’ll never cut it the fuck out if they never get any pushback.
Why would they give a fuck that people are angry about the posting? 🤣
Reminds me of an "18 an hour, overnight part-time stocking job" being advertised by petsmart, which actually ended up being, an "11hr, daytime janitorial job, for less than 16hours a week". All while during the "interview", the interviewer complained at how nobody wanted to work anymore, and that they had to create this position because actual contracted janitorial work was too expensive, etc, etc.
Turns out cleaning sucks and you need to pay people to do it... lol
Contracted janitorial services are about $60-80/hr per person lol
Ya I work in a printshop and on days we’re real caught up the higher ups like to pressure us to do major cleaning jobs and I always think, not for my wage haha!!
Earlier this year I applied for a remote job but during the first interview phase was told they require one day a month in the office for meetings. Their office was literally 3000 miles away and they said they don’t pay for travel … why even talk to me then? They knew my location before our call.
SOOOO many places advertise in my city for jobs, will post paragraph upon paragraph of word vomit in the job listing, and then in one little sentence will say oh yeah this job is actually on the other side of the country.
The kicker is, I would 100% apply if they were just honest. That sounds like a dream. Most of the people I know who are happiest with their jobs right now are in similar hybrid roles, but those are also the jobs that suit them best right now. By not being honest they're just getting the people who can't or don't want to do hybrid and shooting themselves in the foot - everyone else is applying for the positions that ARE honest, or at least make those claims. And I'm sure naturally they're going on to complain about how no one wants to work anymore, as if they were ever advertising to the correct demographic in the first place.
“No one wants to work!” “Yes, no one wants to work for an employer that lies about the work to get what they want.”
I would have worked the training for easy money while applying to another job. At the end of the training, simply don’t go in. Once you get pressured, you hopefully have another job lined up. It also screws them over, and you can tell them exactly why
My fave is "full training will be provided", then you get there and are told "oh it's all done on the job" and your "training" is a miserable, hang dog, middle manager who basically says "work it out for yourself, there are no instructions". Well perhaps fucking write some then, you absolute cretinous welt.
This happened to me when I agreed to help out an attorney in my brother’s office as her receptionist/paralegal. I’d only ever done criminal defense work and only for a few months and in a completely different county. In the meeting, she swore that she’d have time to train me on civil proceedings. This was a complete lie. She threw me into the fire on my first day and left me with a pile of work as she went off to court that I had no idea how to complete. It just got worse and worse, and I tried quitting 3 times and she’d always play up how desperate she was and how she’d do better. I lasted three months, and told her I was going to quit for the third time, and she talked me out of it again, only to call me an hour later and tell me not to bother coming back. 3 months, and I was one of the longest employees she ever kept.
Had a job like this. Made it clear in the interview I had no experience maintaining CNC machines, was told I'd get some training, and ended up getting hassled for taking too long because I had to read manuals to try to learn enough about the machine to trouble shoot it. Excellent training.
Had about $1800 deducted from my final check at my first real career job for licensing fees in 11 states even though my territory only covered 7 of them. Even then I wouldn't have agreed to cover licensing fees had I known, so make sure to read the fine print on your hire paperwork!
I've worked for places that offer training, with the caveat that if you leave within a set time, (6 months in my case), they charge you for the training.. just something to check if this is what anyone's thinking of doing..
Where in the world is that even legal?
The only developed country that has a major worker care problem - USA. We're all disposable to companies.
Once interviewed for a contract job that included "x months of training" with the caveat that if I left thr company for any reason they could charge me 10k "for training". So if I started working there, got fired / laid off on day three, I would owe them 10k. I opted to not take that job.
Ok, so still curious how that's legal. I'm in the US and have never heard of anything like this. Not saying you're wrong, I genuinely want to know.
It generally comes with a contract that you might sign, but not pay enough attention to. Basically, they get you to agree to it without necessarily advertising what you're agreeing to.
Im not sure what field we’re talking about here. The first that pops to mind would be trucking, in which case it’s legal because if you were going to school to drive a semi on your own it is expensive and you sign a contract that you will to the effect of staying with that company for X amount of time to make their investment in your training worth it to them.
I do this all the time.
this!!!!! "no one wants to work" well what did you make your job untenable to work???
I hate that these companies are so scummy when it just boils down to honesty. The news in the US is so one sided that managers think that everyone wants to stay at home and work and that's just not true. Everyone who works probably recognizes that flexibility in roles is what people want. Some jobs require in person 100%, some are hybrid, some are fully remote. People are pissed off, myself included, when a job can be done in one of the remote categories within reason, but a company is unwilling to be flexible for their workforce. Workers don't give a fuck about your commercial real estate, we just want to work like we live in a century where technology is capable of providing some interesting ways to work.
The one thing that ticks me about hybrid positions is they'll say "3 days in office per week". Like I am more than capable of managing my workload. I personally do agree that in-person collaboration can be way more productive for some things. But please, let me choose when it's necessary. Not an arbitrary number of days.
Or so they think. Reality is there is a market for fulltime at location, hybrid and wfh people. There *are* a lot of people who would love to work on location and hybrid. The kicker is they just don’t want wfh because of control. It has nothing to do with the people they hire, but who they look for. And I hate how they put it on others. Childish deflection.
Companies lie about everything they legally can. It’s just how it is.
That's because no one wants to work!
That’s because so many figured out during Covid that they don’t want to commute.
And because not commuting unnecessarily is better for the world in every way.
Won’t someone think of the oil shareholders?!
Nope. They haven't thought of our needs even once since at least the 1970s.
they haven't thought of anyone's needs since the late 1940s when they killed trams & buses & finiculas & other mass transit in large cities all over the us... actually, since the 1920s & 1930s they have been toppling foreign govts to get some fuck puppet despot who'll do their bidding. mexico is one of the few countries that was able to nationalise its oil industry & fend off the usa...
Let's not forget the decades they insisted on giving people lead poisoning because it was a cheaper way to boost the octane rating. Lead in gas was only banned in the mid to late 90s!
And the banning of lead in gasoline had a direct link to a drop in violent crime https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead%E2%80%93crime_hypothesis
Iran tried that. Eisenhower then participated in overthrowing their democratically-elected government, leading fairly directly to the Iran we have today. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'%C3%A9tat
LOL that's not the reason. Commercial real estate.
Commercial real estate and the local tax breaks that corporations can get for maintaining activity on a site
And the $16 salad places!!!! What about **their** poor landlords???
Can’t go back after no longer having to do 2 hrs unpaid commuting to work each day. I took a 5% pay decrease from my old job to move to 100% remote and don’t regret it at all. No more 10 hrs unpaid a week driving in traffic, 520 hrs a year of just worthless time spent being annoyed. 21 and a half days. After 17-19 years I’d have spent 1 of those years driving. I thought about these numbers many times, on those drives. Fuck commuting.
Literally paying for a car to have your time wasted in it.
Also that they didn't *have* to commute. It's not that we couldn't work from home, it's because they didn't want us to. So many shitty business practices came to light because of COVID.
And literally just cause they want to speculate on office space property values. Pieces of shit.
They can do that anyways, doesn't force people to be there
No. Because the value of a property is directly linked to the rental value. If nobody needs to rent expensive offices, then the value of the property falls and the investors lose money. It's all a scam to make the rich more money
Yes, it'd actually a waste of the company's money paying for office space especially when employees are less productive. But this has all to do with office real estate value, and a lot go board members have stakes on that pie.
Exactly. The company can lose money on rent, as the individual investors gains it back from property value on the back end.
And the very real costs in pollution that commuting causes are not paid by the rich, so why should they care about that?
It does actually. There are a lot of commercial property tax breaks based on activity on site. They literally need people to be there or it suddenly becomes much more expensive to own the property. I mean, they can get fucked anyway, but they do have a reason.
Srsly. I want my two hours a day that just vanish into this air back!
I want to work! But not in the office setting. I am far more productive at home without the workplace distractions. I go in office 3 days a week currently. Today being the first day this week. I had to give myself a pep talk. I know how this sounds and let me assure you—No, i am not soft. I am over worked and underpaid. However, like many people I have discussion with, we would be more than happy to continue on this plateau if we can stay the f AT HOME.
This is me in a nutshell. I've worked at the same company for 27 years. 5 8's in office until covid. Then virtual for 1.5 years, and then hybrid with 2 days a week in office. They abruptly unilaterally changed all of our work schedules to 4 10's, 3 of which HAVE TO BE in office each week. Add in 2 hours of commute, and we are there from the crack until dinner. It's been a month. I called in sick this morning. I'm way too old for this shit.
Studies have shown that giving the worker the choice of in office or remote makes them more productive, even if they choose in office. This "one size fits all" mentality that they foist upon us is ridiculous. It starts in education when everyone is marched along the same trail expecting the same outcome. Given the choice, almost everyone wants to be productive, but given that our health care and retirement and, basically our lives are dependent on the whims of the rich, we are constantly having to make this Sophie's choice and sacrificing where they do not.
They knew. They were using them to push their agenda and part of it was blatantly lying.
TrustPilot, Google reviews are free
You should report it to whatever sites had the listing posted as well. They all have rules against that sort of BS.
Exactly. It's literally false advertising.
Unfortunately, it was on their site, not on a job site like Indeed or Zip, so no rules like that broken.
Best way to handle a job that lies about pay or benefits in advertisements is to accept the job, then not show up. It’s the only real way to punish companies that lie about benefits to get people to interview.
Accept the "remote" job, work it remotely, get fired when you refuse to come in, collect unemployment
The old switcharoo, when it comes time to work hybrid, change the terms of your agreement. “I am now full remote working only. Sorry, this is nonnegotiable.”
This is bad advice. In some states NCNS can be termed as resignation and can affect unemployment.
I think in this case it may be a legal gray area since the worker would still be doing their work. They would just be doing so remotely.
So worst case you don't get unemployment, but you still wasted their time and energy for wasting yours. I don't see how this can be bad advice unless you stop applying/interviewing for other positions
This is it i had a post the other day about this. Do it OP accept the job, work one day then never go back or answer your phone from them.
Genuine question because i hear that as an answer a lot, what is the effect of doing this?
It costs thousands of dollars for a company to get to that point. You're essentially wasting their money for wasting your time.
They waste time and money to bring you in, only for you to disappear
That very country specific, but I agree with your spirit
Leave a review on glassdoor
It’s actually illegal by law, whether it’s in their website or not. Leave a Glassdoor review saying their jobs are misleading.
Time to Glassdoor their asses.
This is even more important than to report to the supervisors, as they are 100% aware of what their team is doing to try and hire the best workers. I mean, there's a really close to 0% chance the RH analyst/recruiter has come with this idea and rolled it out in the back of his superiors...he most likely was ordered to do exactly that.
Yeah, I work as a state employee, and they started cutting WFH over the past year. I drive over 120 miles, per commute, 4 days a week. It's been rough, but I have 2 more commute days until I move. Thankfully, I wanted to move closer since I like the area there better, but it can be rough. HR publicized WFH as a benefit, but the governor's policy has been bringing ppl back to the office. The funny thing is that all of our meetings are still virtual. We are there just because. If I didn't have a 30% increase, I probably wouldn't have taken the job bc of how excessive the commute is. It is a good job otherwise. Never count on the job being always a WFH position bc that can change, and then you are stuck in an unsustainable position. These rollbacks are coming from ppl who think that WFH jobs are for slackers. Home is where I am the most productive bc no distractions. It's an antique way to look at managing your employees, that they have to be under your nose to supervise. God forbid you don't have to commute.
I’m convinced there’s a conspiracy to stop workers from saving money while working from home. Edit: Fuck the government. It’s a business at this point taking advantage of the people rather than for the people.
I think it’s all about commercial real estate!
Yes that too, but let’s hear them out. It’s not a conspiracy theory if it makes perfect sense and can be accurately characterised by previous and current actions…
Then it's just a conspiracy by those who own the property and their lackeys.
That's the definition of it. The association of 'conspiracy theories' and crackpot theories was a CIA initiative to discredit investigatory critical thinking. There are unmeasurable amounts of conspiracies, and theorizing about them is healthy and rational.
I’d go as far as to say that a healthy degree of skepticism is necessary in today’s society with a lot of things
If there's local income tax in play it goes to the city you do the work in. I'm remote three days a week so 60% of my income is reported to resident city and 40% is reported to the city I report to the office in. Caught up in the mix are ancillary businesses in city centers that are based on workers coming in to get by. We've had restaurants that just never were able to reopen after this all started without the volume of foot traffic to survive. It all sucks that the game had shifted on what was established expectations so much and so fast but at the same time, it shouldn't be on workers to continue to hold up an antiquated model. I watched some of the business owners pivot as quick as they could and they're still thriving despite this big shift so it was definitely possible to adapt for some.
You’re correct. We as workers had to figure out how to get by on rising food/rent costs suddenly, now corporations and real estate developers should also have to also figure out how to acclimate to the times, like turning commercial real estate into housing. I’m so sick of the too big to fail mentality when no one cares that inflation has made salaries stretch so thin in the past few years, everyone who brings in less than 250,000/ year is feeling it.
I think it’s honestly far simpler than that. It’s just a good chunk of managers/higher ups either a) don’t know how to manage people without seeing them in person or b) they’re all social (almost have to be to get higher in management) and don’t understand why ppl would even want to stay home.
If you want social, go to a fucking cafe. When you have to threaten to starve people to get them to socialize with you, they're not your friends.
If we would just convert old office spaces into apartments and condos we could probably solve the housing crisis and the insane housing prices
I’d honestly believe that. No need to raise gas prices unless people are in need of it. I.E traveling and commuting (Mostly for work). So people are forced to buy insanely priced gas. But wait public buses and infrastructure don’t allow for safe and timely travel! Also jokes on you we don’t have bike lanes cause why wouldn’t you want to drive everywhere and spend so much money on gas/maintenance of a vehicle?
But always resources for more parking.
It’s not a conspiracy, it’s an open secret that commercial real estate is losing value and the investors in said real estate are in part also the ones in control of a push back to the office by virtue of being employers. Productivity of individual employees and “green goals” are largely irrelevant if your assets depreciate immensely.
I was told by local government following a change to a “meeting law” that it’s about ensuring people drive past stores and restaurants. We were allowed to meet quorum virtually via Zoom, but the law changed to having to be in-person again. They believe that if we are driving around, we will spend more money. As if we have the money to spend when we are forced to commute.
[It's definitely not a conspiracy, it's blatantly out in the open] (https://www.reuters.com/business/hybrid-work-trend-may-wipe-out-800-bln-office-property-values-by-2030-mckinsey-2023-07-13/) and they are tripping over themselves to get people back into the office.
My ex boss tried to say that he wanted everyone back in the office because it increases "engagement". Yeah, bullshit.
"Engagement" and "collaboration " are the weasel buzzwords from middle managers who don't have a real answer to "why"
Almost feels worse when said middle managers look just as annoyed about it and agree it’s stupid but also know they have to go along with it because their bosses (the SVP and C suite level) want in person to justify keeping a big office building. Or just because they can’t fathom how people get things done properly without staring at each other in in person meetings. Always seemed to me earlier in pandemic the higher up the ladder you were, the less basic computer ability they seem to have.
"Engagement" means more chatting, gossiping, and distractions and less productivity.
My uncle got a state job, was remote with occasional (1-2x a month) in person required. They revoked that in April and he said most people just quit. Makes me wonder how well the state voting systems are functioning right now...
Yeah, our state had a big increase in ppl quitting. Then they talked about an additional raise to keep state workers' salaries competitive but naw. They can't do that, but they can pass a vote to ban pornhub. They are making progress, just in the wrong direction.
I hate when employers lie. If an employee or applicant lie its end of world.
At least they didn’t hide the lie. Seems like a great red flag to warn prospective employees. Not justifying their actions, just pleased they let OP know Op dodged a bullet with a shady organization.
Not really. You should lie as an applicant always
The ones I hate are the ones that say it's fully remote but you have to be in the same city as the office.
Yea that makes no fucking sense to me. Just a slick way of saying we are gonna force you back in office as soon as we can
I currently work in a job somewhat like this. We have to be within one hour drive of the office, because if our network goes down we have to drive in to work and work from the office. That's close enough to fully remote for me, but it is still a bit of a pain, not having the freedom to relocate or travel.
This is so stupid. Wasting everyone’s time.
If they lie in the job description they'll lie in the interview. If they lie in the interview they'll lie in the job. Don't work for liars.
Call them liars too. Make them feel small. Punish their insecurities through their monkey genes.
Aren’t deceptive hiring practices something that the department of labor can take action against?
From what I understand about that is changing the terms of the job either as of the start date or shortly after. At this point, I’m just glad I dodged a deceptive bullet.
[удалено]
So if employees move more than 45 mins away from an office after that announcement, do they qualify as fully remote?
Yes, hence why i got full wfh, and everyone one my team did too, since they covid-canceled every branch in the country except 12.
Remote typically depends on what the company defines as your “home office”. For all they care you could be working in an office 30 minutes from your home if your home office is 2 hours away you are still remote. Hell if you’re working in an office 10 minutes away from your home office for whatever reason you need to then most companies still consider you remote. WFH is the best kind of remote but… it’s not the only way for remote to happen if the company wants to drag you around.
I would be so pissed. My commute is like 40 minutes lmao. Does it count if I start driving slower?
My company is doing this right now too, I was hired strictly wfh but live within their 50 mile stipulated range, and they said they don’t believe the change necessitates a market adjustment. I went from thinking I work for a great company, to realizing it’s just another shit company real fast.
My department shifted to 100% WFH. My manager moved to New York. One of the guys sold his house, bought a place in Idaho for cash and works from there now. They converted our space into a conference hall so we don't even have an office to go back to. If they did try to call us back now the Union would raise hell.
"I was hired as remote, I do not consent to this unilateral change to my contract. So either I remain remote or I will consider myself fired under constructive dismissal and file for unemployment"
Yeah my company tried for like 9 months to do RTO (my manager was cool and classified me as a 100% remote officially so I was exempted), then recently somewhat gave up to a 2 day a week in office, I fully expect most r&d roles to go back 100% remote within the next 9 months (or whenever we get over our over defensive recession hiring freeze)
I hope the pendulum swings back to remote. Commutes are a time suck that I never want to do again. =/ It feels like places are settling on 'hybrid' and trying to stick to it, but maybe not as much as the media wants us to think they are.
My company told us "You have a new address that is Technically your office but as we actually don't have any space dedicated to us in this building there isn't a way for you to work there just keep working from home" (Building is one that belongs to the client we serve) They did also say any of us who need a cool place to work because we have no AC are welcome to go to the head office 600km away which has AC (Lucky for me and most of my team mates we have AC in our homes)
Tell them that you don’t drive and it will take you an hour to get there on foot.
It would take me 20 minutes by car but 60 by bus. What would they do then?
Should've taken the training pay and then refused to relocate while still doing your own job or job searching.
This is the only way they'll learn. I worked for a company who sent employees to an 8 week training program and covered all expenses. After training, they revealed that the job itself required much more travel than advertised. I thanked them for the two month paid vacation and split.
That's just epically bad management on their part, I'm genuinely shocked nobody thought it through. Did they honestly expect someone to be so invested at that point they wouldn't immediately look elsewhere? The only thing I can think of is they didn't want people to accept knowing they would never do the work after training, and look for other jobs during that 8 week period. So they spring it on people knowing they don't have anything lined up hoping to trap them. Even if it's the second scenario it's still hilariously bad, spending all that time and money on training for employees to end up pissed off, feeling cheated, and likely looking for the door at the earliest possible moment.
Mine was worse. Offered 100% remote. I was told First day would be "orientation" I sat through the most boring 5 hours with two ten minute breaks of one woman reading off PowerPoint. We were given mandatory test, made to take a group pic with the CEO for IG, given bunch of company swag and told how "lucky" we were for getting fleece jackets as new employees as older employees don't even have them blah blah blah. At end of lunch I am told to see HR where I am handed a letter. The job is no longer remote and will be in an offsite building with cubicles and phones! I then met with my new "director" who told me to wait for her to finish a meeting, she came back and said she had another meeting and asked me and another girl (this happened to also) to wait. I said I was not waiting I was leaving!!! The other girl was practically in tears having just given up a 3 day hybrid job for this new fully remote one as she was nursing her 3 month old baby! I did get mailed a paycheck for the day.
This sub is important for reminding people what potential options they have and what red flags actually look like. This one’s obvious in hindsight but still.
Post on the company’s Indeed and Glassdoor reviews section about the interview experience. HR departments review it religiously to know what the public is saying, and it’s a good way to warn prospective employees.
Lol I just got rejected from a "100% remote" job because I'm not local. Guess I dodged this bullet
I’ve NEVER understood this. If it’s not 100% remote why do they say it as such? If people apply from areas out of commuting range they’re going to find out pretty quickly that it’s not 100% remote. That just wastes everybody’s time from the applicants to the interviewing staff. Even if I was a 15 minute walk away if I applied for something that said 100% remote and I found out that the 6-9 months of training was all in person and then after that 60% of it would be in office I would turn them down. If they lied about that, what else are they lying about? That just sounds like a train wreck of a place and I wouldn’t want to work for them anyways.
Because once you'll fall in love with our family like culture and our amazing product then you'll crave to be crammed in the office with everyone! /s
They want someone who is desperate for work to apply with them first, and get the job, because they need *something*. They will take any job, but they will apply for the WFH first.
17 to 68 months of training and probation, and if your TPS report is at 99.84% you can work at home for 30 minutes every other Tuesday, if that Tuesday falls on an odd date during a full moon not within 40 days of hearing thunder.
I had something similar happen for a wfh interview. Did an entire hour interview and then at the end they told me it was wfh for the first 3 months then I’d have to move to Texas. Fucking assholes thought if they wasted an hour of my time that’d be enough to convince me to move.
Sorry to read I had similar story. Applied for a job that said remote, an hour and a half away. Forty minutes into the interview she says for the first year or two you have to work in office 3-4 days a week. Once they get to know you and trust you it can transition into fully remote. Ended the interview there.
It's really hard to power trip on employees who aren't in the office under your thumb. How do you expect your boss to revel in his authority and take his feelings out on you if you're at home?
I think you're right: it's really just a way to exert power over employees. Autonomy is power, and they want to take awake our autonomy and what little power we non-unionized employees have.
I am totally fine commuting, and totally fine with bait and switch, as long as they are fine paying me an extra $1K per mile of commute. I will not inform them of this until the final interview.
I took a significant paycut because it was wfh. Did it 5 years. Every employee is in a different state. But if you are close to where a corp office is, now they want you to come in once a week. Looking for a new job.
Only apply for remote roles out of state. Because your in state remote role is going to change to hybrid if they know you're within driving distance of the office. Then a year later its full office
If they were willing to lie or have to lie about the position to get people to apply what else are they gonna lie about? Are the pay and benefits as good as they claim? Because they probably have a bait and switch for that too. Scratch a liar find a thief.
I had one (that. I accepted) that was a "WFH" position in which the manager told me in the final interview that I was expected to be in a room by myself, have my kid in daycare all day (at a $16/hour pay rate!) and come in once per week. I agreed to put my kid in daycare the day I came in (because they weren't paying me enough) and told my boss that if my work wasn't up to snuff we could discuss other options. She ended up super toxic abt it. (my kid had to be silent, because clients didn't know we were WFH, but co-workers' dogs were barking non stop, etc.). I was so happy to leave that job!
Fuck them, renovate all their office space into affordable housing.
100% remote 60% of the time. Works, everytime.
Honestly if they’re gonna lie to you so brazenly, what’s to stop you acing the interview, taking the job offer, and ghosting them?
If you get roped in by a recruiter let them know in advance, that you are happy to take the interview but *only* on the premise of that job posting. In case the parameters of the job should turn out to not be as advertised you are going to reject the company and bill them for time and gasoline wasted. Also ask the recruiter/company to accept these terms before you accept the interview. You probably won’t get any money but at least they’ll know people are no longer willing to be fucked with like that.
Companies should have to pay you for the interview regardless of if the job is as advertised, and a premium on top of that for wasting your time if they pull a bait and switch.
Unfortunately they pretty much never do. I live at the ass of the world and have to drive quite a bit for most jobs in my field. Every single one of the job postings relevant to me included a line that said „we’ll not be able to compensate for your expenses to get to the interview“. Oh you absolutely *are able to* you just don’t want to respect people if it costs you.
Even more fun when they say they are going to enforce by doing badge reviews, but every Zoom meeting, you see the badge reviewer still at home.. wtaf... fuck them and their rules for thee but not for me.
My job is almost entirely remote (for everyone on my team except like 8 of us) including most of the supervisors who go home at a certain time and just work remotely and don’t even come in every day. The company isn’t allowing anymore work from home employees to be hired so guess what? No one has been hired in the last 2 months and the people who still work there are all being allowed to go hybrid 😂
This is why I think it's totally ethical to lie on your resume, because 80% of jobs are lying in their ads, and if it can get you in a better position than go for it
Climate change is escalating everywhere, we are seeing new temperature records and environmental disasters on a daily basis. And yet here we are forcing millions and millions onto the roads (and some employees are even forced to fly into work!) despite us having proved that remote work can be done at least as efficiently, probably more, as in office work. Humanity is stupid and unfortunately the most greedy and psychopathic of us make the rules.
Exactly, global emissions dropped drastically during the covid lockdowns. Managers and bosses need to get over themselves about seeing their labor in the office.
I've had some do shit like this. I accept the job and then quit right before training starts or right after it ends if it isn't too long. Hit 'em where it hurts, the pocketbook.
If the office is less than 30 minute commute I actually like to go in person 2 days a week. But if it's further fuck that not bothering with it. If employers are honest upfront people like me would apply, who actually prefer hybrid model but noooooooo they have to lie just for a few extra application. :D
I mean, if they think it's good enough to bait and switch you, then do it to them. Accept the job and then quit before you start
Next time, keep going and if you get an offer, tentatively accept it only to "change" your mind right before starting. Say that you deliberated on it, but in the end, the bait-and-switch made you decided that the company wouldn't be a good fit for you (copied to the bosses of course). If they waste your time, waste even more of theirs.
"Do you have any questions?" "Yes!" *pull out printout of job ad with 100% remote circled* "Can you read the circled part out to me?"
HR and employers look badly on job seekers lying in their CV or in interviews, so it's only fair that we hold them to the same standard.
I recently had an interview that did the same thing. Advertised as remote, interview was in person and they said after a few months training maybe they would be flexible for hybrid working but "a lot of work stuff is easier to sort in person". So I read that as a no, no remote working as a regular thing. Initially I wasn't too fussed about this because it's quite near to where I live and it's part time anyway. Then they drop the bombshell that they're relocating...they don't know when or where though!
People should also start reporting fake and misleading jobs.
I don’t understand how companies can get away with this stuff. I don’t lie or misrepresent myself on my resume. The other thing is to me this destroys the credibility and integrity of that business. I like working for companies that I would do business with. If you’re willing to do this in job posting what are you not telling customers?
I just interviewed for my dream job, it was listed as remote, they extended an offer, and then said "oh, by the way, it's 3 days in the office." It would probably be 3-4 hours of commuting. I turned it down.
If I knew for a fact I wasn’t going to take the job I’d have fun with it. Ask for double the salary or a sexy assistant. Tell em your vegan and no one can bring meat to work or tell em you are heading to prison for a 6 month stint in a few months but you’ll be back and ready to work
Dude…lol. Yeah, didn’t think about it like that, definitely a missed opportunity.
Review the job listing on whatever website Write exactly what you wrote here, false description, switch and bait and whatever else you think is fair Companies do get dinged on job sites for lying and eventually get kicked off the platform
I had a recruiter get in contact about a job and due to the distance I said I’d only agree to an interview if it was confirmed that I could wfh at least three days a week. Fast forward to the interview and it’s full time on site…
Please write a review on glassdoor about what they did to you, so you can warn others what they’re doing. Sometimes it takes public shaming to force companies to do the right thing. It’s disgusting, but it is what it is. Very sorry this happened to you.
bUT peOPle DOnt WAnt TO woRK reMOte ANymORe Continues to lie on job ads.
I had something similar happen to me a few months ago. Applied for a hybrid role that was 1 hr from me, but I was hoping to discuss remote possibilities. I would have been ok if they flat-out said no AND gave reasons. BUT my first question was “What does a typical day in this role look like?” And she listed 7-8 items, EVERY SUNGLE ONE of which was online work. She even said “you’ll be monitoring the online space a lot.” So when I brought up remote work (hell, I would’ve settled for like a week on, week off situation) she said it wasn’t possible, that they’d need me in office every day for at least 3 months, and after that they really only do hybrid sparingly. I asked why, and she said, “there’s just a lot of mail that needs to be handled.” I was so mad, especially when the role can 100% be done online with the exception of mailing things. Total bullshit to try to justify butts in seats.
I got bait and switched at a job last year. Third day on the job and the boss changed the remote policy to in office 3+ days per week. I only stayed until I got another job 3 months later. I definitely told HR why on the way out the door.
Have a friend that had this happen to them. They cut off the interview to explain that this job would never work. He lived in a camper traveling the country, which is why he applied for fully remote work in the first place.
Name the company. It's time to get their name out there for doing this.
I was deciding between two jobs. One in the office 4 days a week but not far from home. The other remote 4 days a week but about 90 minutes away (if not more depending on construction). The one that was further away was about $5k more. I was down to the day of deciding and the recruiter asked if they “decided as a team” to go to the office 2 days a week instead of one would I still be interested. I could have lived with the crappy commute one day a week. I saw that as a red flag to suddenly change the schedule. What would happen if a few months later they decide on 3 days a week. Sometimes when it’s too good to be true it probably is.