47
my employer is making me buy a new PC for my remote job (or update and use my own, instead)
(self.casualconversation)
this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2025
47 points (96.1% liked)
Casual Conversation
1910 readers
362 users here now
Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.
RULES (updated 01/22/25)
- Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
- Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
- Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
- Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
- No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
- Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.
Casual conversation communities:
Related discussion-focused communities
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
No, the correct answer is "No, it's your duty as employer to provide me with the tools to do my work".
No beed to start bluffing and making excuses when the other end is wrong from the start.
Right except in shitty telemarking jobs the response to that is "Sure thing, so there's the door, goodbye". I know because I have had family work in them, and they'll just hire someone else. I was trying to give an example of how to be tactful and maybe not get fired.
If you get fired for that, you should take them to your state's Labor board and/or to court.
If they're making minimum wage working paycheck to paycheck they probably can't afford being out of work for very long, neither of those options puts food on the table next week. Going to court also requires a lawyer that is going to cost much more, especially if they have no income. You keep talking about what should happen. Yes, what you're saying should be the way to go, but in reality it doesn't work.
Going to the Labor board, at least here in Oregon, is pretty painless and may be doable while still working there. My only experience with them was after an employer just locked us all out of the building and closed one day, so continuing to work wasn't an option for me. They treated me well and got me money quickly, then took the guy to court to get it back themselves.
Also, I don't "keep talking" about much here; the comment you replied to was the first one I made :).
Sorry you're right, I didn't notice the change in user. I am tired of the argument though that "Why don't they just sue", and people being unwilling to see that the vast majority of Americans can't afford the luxury of suing, that our legal system is a pay to play system. What you're describing, if you already don't have the job I say go for it 100%, anything you can do you should. But, I don't blame anyone for avoiding getting fired even though they're morally in the right
You would include all court costs and legal fees in the lawsuit. Plus significant damages.
Right and in the meantime they have no income. That's not an immediate process, it can take months, years even. In the immediate if they lose their job they have no income. It means no rent payment, no food money, most people have no savings and live paycheck to paycheck. They have to find another job while waiting on this lawsuit. I don't blame someone in that position for not wanting to get fired, even if they are morally in the right.