Thread regarding Citigroup Inc. / Citibank / Citi layoffs

Are Companies Using RTO Rules to Fire People With Cause and Avoid Severance?

A Reddit post in r/bell claims that Bell has been firing employees “with cause” for not returning to the office three days a week, allegedly with no severance and no prior warning.

One commenter, who says they were terminated, argues that this is unfair because they were working from their designated office two days a week plus another Bell office on a third day most weeks. They also claim they worked more than the standard 37.5 hours per week and had strong performance reviews.

Their main argument is that, while companies can set return-to-office rules, terminating someone “with cause” should normally require progressive discipline first, such as a verbal warning, written warning, suspension, and then termination, unless the behavior qualifies as severe misconduct. They argue that simply not being in the designated office three days a week, or “coffee badging,” should not automatically count as severe misconduct unless the employee is also failing to work their required hours, which could be considered time theft.

Overall, the discussion is about whether companies are using RTO enforcement as a way to terminate employees without severance, and whether missing office-day requirements should legally or ethically justify a “for cause” dismissal.


by
| 22 views | | 8 replies (last May 15) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1kr78wxxk

8 replies (most recent on top)

@tb sounds like you were one of them.

Sincerely,
HR

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @11j+1kr78wxxk

When a "Manager" has 50% + of their employees/direct reports QUIT within a 12 month period, the problem is the "manager", NOT the employees.

Employees don't keep trying to fix the unfixable relationship. They Quit, give up, get a Divorce AND doNOT "Do Better".

This is Human Nature and Life.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @tb+1kr78wxxk

@hj bankruptcy. LOL. This is the worst example of trolling I’ve seen in a long time. Citi is much better off without usu.

Sincerely,
HR

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @hs+1kr78wxxk

@b8

The employees who choose to NOT Comply with RTO and choose to Quit are the employees with options because they're the better employees with sought-after skills and knowledge employers want.

Employers who enforce RTO, even at 3 days instead of 5 days per week risk losing their best employees to Quitting. Employers are Sh00ting themselves in the foot.

Employees who remain end up in, feed and create a company like Citi.....endless cycle of Dysfunction, Consent Orders, MRIAs, Stone Age Labyrinthine "Technology", Toxic Backst@bbing corporate culture, Toxic "Managers", Financially struggling, NOT meritocratic, cannot afford to pay better salaries or give In-seat promotions and thus canNot attract better qualified employees, unable to sell more products to customers, unable to obtain new or retain customers, has products customers don't want because competitors have better or cheaper products, ad infinitum.

Lather, Rinse, Repeat.

The writing has been on the Walls for decades. Citi's days are numbered and RRP Bankruptcy is inevitable.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @hj+1kr78wxxk

@cy

Walmart and other retail companies have always had the Martyr yourself for your employer corporate culture expectations.

90% of their employees make minimum wage salaries, are uneducated and so, Walmart etc. subjugates their employees because the employees have few if any other employment options.

This is especially the case in the Southern and Midwestern States.

There are also fewer employers/companies in those States.

Lesson here is to move out of those States. Put the power and options back into the hands of employees because then the employees have more and better labor rights and protections in addition to getting higher salaries.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @hh+1kr78wxxk

Walmart has mandated RTO and forced remote employees to relocate to AR or be terminated.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cy+1kr78wxxk

"They argue that simply not being in the designated office three days a week, or 'coffee badging,' should not automatically count as severe misconduct unless the employee is also failing to work their required hours, which could be considered time theft."

"They" aren't the CEO of the company, so "their" argument about what should or should not count matters to nobody.

Expectations that apply to job duties, performance, etc., vary widely across divisions, departments, employees, and roles - they're not the same for everyone and require disciplinary actions that can vary just as widely.

Expectations that apply to all employees across the board and have been communicated repeatedly pretty much limit options for disciplinary actions to one: termination. Not one person is unaware of the expectation for attendance having only one method of achieving compliance: showing up. There's literally no excuse or other option. You comply or you don't.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @b8+1kr78wxxk

Sure, fair game.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @am+1kr78wxxk

Post a reply

: