Hey - I would not argue against that.
Seems pretty crappy to blame the employees for accepting job offers offered by a company that was previously offering work-from-home employment, who then yoinked it back afterwards once the product started pulling back up.
Especially since we hear that Blizzard’s pay is substandard for the industry, on top of California’s high cost of living.
5 Likes
Like my Grand Pappy Cursewords used to say: “I hear pie in the sky and caviar dreams all day, but I seldom sign a contract to them.”
“Crappy” is how you put it. If people accept job offers, they accepted a job. They are free to find better work. At least in the good ol USA. IDK where you speak of.
1 Like
It is akin to applying to be a Fox News Fact checker, and being shocked that Hosts who garner the top ratings want you fired.
You signed up for a thing with a storied history
Sorry Curse, but I don’t agree.
Blizzard was offering Work from Home positions to folks outside of locations where Blizzard has offices. They were also giving current employees the option to be able to go to other states and continue working (one Blizzard staffer I know moved to Washington State because they were given these assurances).
Now Blizzard, like many other companies, is desperate to get employees back into the office so they can justify the costs they’re paying to keep said offices running and it’s creating havoc with the employees they remote hired and those they gave assurances to with respect to being able to work from home in other states.
It’s one thing to say: “Hey, look, work from home is a temporary thing. We’re going to be returning to the office eventually, so we can’t hire you if you don’t live within commuting distance to one of our offices and we won’t be able to reliably keep you on board if you move to another state during this time.”
It’s another thing to give assurances to staff that this was going to be the way forward and then yank those assurances because it’s no longer convenient.
If they had gone with the former, then you’d be right. In that scenario Blizzard would have gone on record to state that it was only temporary, they wouldn’t be hiring WFH talent or giving staff members the go ahead to move across state lines and then when they announced RTO, even if not popular, they could point to their statements and say: “Look, we did state that this was temporary, that it wouldn’t continue forever. It’s ending now.”
They’d cop some flak, maybe lose a few staff members who decided to move out of state or out of commuting distance, but everything else would be fine.
But instead they did do a lot of remote hiring, and they did give assurances that WFH would be supported and would not be temporary and now they’re clawing that back. That puts them 100% in the wrong.
9 Likes
Oh that is fine. I do not bring stuff up on the premise that either of us is a member of a regulatory board federally or statewise. Or a member of the Blizzard corporation or their future overlord, Microsoft. We have our opinions. I think our opinions are likely inconsequential to what ever settlement occurs down the line.
I largely agree with most of this thread…but the argument of : “going to work offends me” is getting tiresome. I understand suing for the Cosby Crew stuff, and for stealing breast milk from the Rec room, and all the other stuff. That was egregious. But the crocodile tears about having to go to work in 2023? Oi vey.
3 Likes
Going to work shouldn’t mean going to a physical location lmao
Again, Dragonflight is the best expansion they shipped in a long time and the net majority of the team is not in California, doing work remotely
It is evident from Dragonflight that quality Blizzard products are not dependent on being on campus, and dare I say, may be inversely proportional to how many people are on campus.
It’s 2023, majority of white collar jobs are virtual, there’s no need for physically being present in some overpriced town in California
6 Likes
If this is the case then Blizzard is at fault. I didn’t know the circumstances of how Blizzard hired people in regard to this issue, so I wasn’t sure if it were your former example or the latter. If Blizzard didn’t inform applicants that WFH is temporary then that was unwise. It’s not something difficult to let potential employees know. Blizzard obviously isn’t in dire need of employees so it’s not a policy they’d have to stay with to keep the company going.
sobs in job that can’t be done remotely.
3 Likes
ibid x2 same
1 Like
-Reposting since blizzard didn’t like how I described small towns as thrusting actions into posteriors-
There is “I work better at the office/not at home” and there is “You have to be in the office to a job that you do just as well, or better, from home/location of choice.”
The first is based upon personal knowledge and doing what is best for you as an individual that still contributes to your organization. I fall into this category. I’m still on campus despite the option to work from home because I know I’d slack off, hop on WoW on another computer, and destroy my mental and emotional health over time.
The second comes from disconnected CEOs and upper management that could care less about their workers and see them little more than drones to order around for a better bottom line. It is cruel and unethical, ableist in some cases, and in our current environment just anti-worker. We have solved most, if not all, communication barriers and collaborative needs while proving and equal or greater amount of work gets accomplished with happier workers. They have more of their lives back in their control coupled with a better financial state. Now, moving out of high cost of living SOCAL to a small town to maximize your paycheck has its own problems, but is beyond this scope.
Blizzard, and others, are going to continue to lose and hemorrhage good workers because of this and really the only way to stop it is to unionize.
To the continued conversation and what I was going to continue on, either massive overhall at the top needs to happen to reverse this decision (unlikely) or they unionize and make the demands for a work from home agreement (less unlikely). My position you have to at least live in IL and can be granted a work from home agreement after your probation period. Its not the best but its a lot better than what they’re getting offered.
And for those who are like ‘what do we even need unions for,’ its this, its exactly this. Substandard pay, poor work conditions, forced overtime and crunch hours, workplace harassment by management, and having decisions reversed at some out of touch CEO’s whim. Not even like WFH but your PTO policy, healthcare, pay, or even employment. A union and a good contract saves you from all of that, and its not even an exaggeration. So not only does Blizz need one, honestly all of us here need one if you can get one.
5 Likes
I’d never join a union so no.
2 Likes
Unions aren’t that great. I worked for one before and never again. My current job treats me great, pays me well and I have great consistent 40 hr work week.
IWW IU620 and delegate. You could have had a sour experience, its not like those don’t happen as if every union is perfect. Organized labor, however, is exactly what provides equitable treatment, good pay, and consistent benefits even if the position you’re currently at is non-union. Helps everybody, even your customers and consumers, hurts nobody.
5 Likes
Activision employee vs Activision consumer
I suggested a similar situation for California companies like Blizzard. (Delaware Incorporations aside)
You are on some union jag - and that is fine. I am glad that we can find some agreement as far as empowering the states like Illinois and California. The states that carry the peanut gallery Red States.
Edit : for context as well as in reply to the OP
Just as the poster mentioned Illinois based residency, I would think California of all places should do similarly.
1 Like
Depends on the industry and the union. I’m frankly surprised more aircraft dont fall out of the sky everyday because aircraft produced by Boeing in their Carolina plants are of significantly lower quality than the ones built by union workers in Washington.
1 Like
True. I could have been a little more specific. Retail unions are generally terrible and work against the workers in the end.
I’m not anti union, just very skeptical about them due to the work I do
2 Likes
This isn’t true, it’s literally what union-busting companies say to discourage people from joining a union.
5 Likes