Read the article. It’s the UK (which still has most EU employment law active). Now, I don’t think it’s illegal to do what they’re doing. Effectively, I can bet I know exactly how they’re framing this, and it’ll be totally legal.
The calls were almost certainly initiating the redundancy process. That is, technically EVERYONE (probably below management) is being made redundant. As part of the redundancy process, an employer is expected to attempt to find internal opportunities for the employees to be culled, and this new position is what they are likely offering as said opportunity. I suspect this is working around a bit of a grey area in redundancy law. But, I don’t think they’re falling foul of any law. But, I’m not a legal expert.
So, at the end of the required redundancy period (it varies based on employment duration) they will either be let go (with whatever statutory redundancy pay they’re owed) or re-employed under the new zero hours contract.
Personally, I think this has the potential to blow up in their face a bit. It’s not allowed in the UK to employ someone on a zero-hour contract and not allow them to work elsewhere. Such a clause in a contract may be ignored. Now, this could well mean they say “Oh we need you on Wednesday” and you say “Well, actually I’ve already agreed a shift elsewhere on Wednesday” and there’s really not much they can do about it. I also hope the people working there just move on.
The worst thing that can happen is that the parent company benefits from this. It’ll just make other retail companies do the same in a race to the bottom.
Well, in the first line they reference an article from yesterday which made it very clear.
I’m not too sure why the response was so defensive. That point made up a miniscule part of my overall comment and wasn’t even close to the primary subject matter.
Okay so it’s a British paper talking about people getting laid off. It never made any reference to the US, so why would you jump to assuming it’s about the US if it’s a British paper and never made any reference to the US? Do you think the UK doesn’t have game development companies? What is it about this that makes you think it’s an innately US thing? This is not a US specific community.
Also your footer/signature accomplishes nothing except clutter up the fediverse. Can you imagine if every single user had one of those? The fediverse would be unreadable. And your ::: syntax doesn’t work on every platform or app so all it does it make it more obnoxious, at least on my Lemmy app.
Saw that response coming. I’m just saying maybe don’t assume everything is American before asking a question like that, and especially don’t do it for a website with “euro” in the name
Read the article. It’s the UK (which still has most EU employment law active). Now, I don’t think it’s illegal to do what they’re doing. Effectively, I can bet I know exactly how they’re framing this, and it’ll be totally legal.
The calls were almost certainly initiating the redundancy process. That is, technically EVERYONE (probably below management) is being made redundant. As part of the redundancy process, an employer is expected to attempt to find internal opportunities for the employees to be culled, and this new position is what they are likely offering as said opportunity. I suspect this is working around a bit of a grey area in redundancy law. But, I don’t think they’re falling foul of any law. But, I’m not a legal expert.
So, at the end of the required redundancy period (it varies based on employment duration) they will either be let go (with whatever statutory redundancy pay they’re owed) or re-employed under the new zero hours contract.
Personally, I think this has the potential to blow up in their face a bit. It’s not allowed in the UK to employ someone on a zero-hour contract and not allow them to work elsewhere. Such a clause in a contract may be ignored. Now, this could well mean they say “Oh we need you on Wednesday” and you say “Well, actually I’ve already agreed a shift elsewhere on Wednesday” and there’s really not much they can do about it. I also hope the people working there just move on.
The worst thing that can happen is that the parent company benefits from this. It’ll just make other retail companies do the same in a race to the bottom.
Yes, made very clear in the article, thank you.
Anti Commercial AI thingy
CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Well, in the first line they reference an article from yesterday which made it very clear.
I’m not too sure why the response was so defensive. That point made up a miniscule part of my overall comment and wasn’t even close to the primary subject matter.
Anti Commercial AI thingy
CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
OK buddy, I’ll leave you to your online persona :)
They literally reference British pounds in the article…
A British newspaper converting a foreign currency to the local one to make it more relatable to its audience. Unheard of. Never happened.
Anti Commercial AI thingy
CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Okay so it’s a British paper talking about people getting laid off. It never made any reference to the US, so why would you jump to assuming it’s about the US if it’s a British paper and never made any reference to the US? Do you think the UK doesn’t have game development companies? What is it about this that makes you think it’s an innately US thing? This is not a US specific community.
Also your footer/signature accomplishes nothing except clutter up the fediverse. Can you imagine if every single user had one of those? The fediverse would be unreadable. And your
:::syntax doesn’t work on every platform or app so all it does it make it more obnoxious, at least on my Lemmy app.Are we really not going to talk about how the website is EURO gamer?
Yes, EURO gamer only reports on European companies and European games and European hardware. They’d never report on US companies ever.
Anti Commercial AI thingy
CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Saw that response coming. I’m just saying maybe don’t assume everything is American before asking a question like that, and especially don’t do it for a website with “euro” in the name