Sounds like the company needs to increase its bus factor. Luckily, I can help the company by not doing any of this nonsense, to pressure execs into hiring more staff so that the team is robust enough to weather a catastrophe.
Employers can require an employee to be “on-call” and available to work on an emergency or as-needed basis. Employers are generally not required to pay employees who are “on-call,” unless the employee is actually called to duty. However, if an employer places significant restrictions on how an employee spends their time while on-call, this time may need to be compensated as hours worked.
The tenth circuit of appeals came up with this test to determine if the employers restriction constitutes on call hours as hours worked.
Where the employee is not required to remain on the employer’s premises, the critical inquiry is whether the employee is able to use the time effectively for his or her own purposes. Here, the report requirement necessarily entailed that the employee could not drink alcohol, must be able to dress in uniform, and must be able to travel to the airport, park, and pass through security within one hour of a call. She was not able to make or attend doctors’ appointments for herself or her children, do her weekly shopping, nor go on field trips with her children. The court compared these circumstances with many FLSA cases presenting similar, or even more restrictive, circumstances involving availability by pager, inability to drink alcohol, and ability to report within 30 minutes or one hour. In the FLSA cases, it was determined that the employees’ activities were not so curtailed as to require the on-call time to be considered compensable working time. The court followed this precedent.
On call rules AND on call pay, or STFU. Your staffing problem isn’t my problem and I can contact legal authorities if you do write me up for having my phone off or just not coming in.
It’s basically all of the content on r/antiwork after that community decided to throw itself off the golden gate bridge over an awkward interview that didn’t even fucking matter, on Fox “news” of all places
Yeah, I still can’t believe after all this time that people haven’t gained some perspective on that. Like, Fox News viewers were never going to respect an antiwork community regardless.
I can’t help but think that part of it is based on subconscious transphobia about the mod who gave the interview, especially considering all the blatant misgendering and disproportionate rage directed at them by the community.
It was a really disturbing outcome, and the interview itself was insignificant compared to the behavior of the users. I’ve never seen such a large community implode over something so small. That was one moment I realized that … maybe I shouldn’t really be on reddit.
I mean the fact that people seem to think that a growing global movement on workers rights was derailed by one debacle of a fox news interview of a reddit mod is…not a good look overall. I legit got attacked on lemmy a couple of days ago for pointing out hey notice how a right wing fuckhead getting pwned doesn’t destroy their reputation? Ya wanna think about that and why you’re doing their propaganda for them?
it really felt like a purity politics moment. Bug fuck insane when you’re talking about change.
Yeah, I’ve heard of making a mountain out of a molehill, but this was more like making an anthill into Mt. Everest. And anyone who tried to approach the situation rationally was immediately shouted down by angry mobs. It was hugely disappointing to see.
Depending on the country/state that could obligate the company to pay for devices if they’re going to require they have them.
Not to mention possible “on call” pay could apply as well.
I wonder if people who make these things (if real) even think of throwing them by HR or some professional who could help them avoid the legal implications of these kinds of things.
Add comment