> Maybe I just have abnormal leverage

It could also be a personality thing or a worldview thing.

Some people just have a hard time saying "no" in general, or are constantly looking for reasons to jump at shadows.

Or there's people teaching that the world runs on class warfare and anyone with any amount of power is always looking for an excuse to abuse that power.

This is a pretty self-selecting group, so I'm not surprised that most people reading this don't have a problem with after-hours coms. If you've ever worked in hospitality or retail, you'll know that managers will call/contact you at all hours to make sure they have coverage. It's irritating.

You don’t have to take that job if you don’t like it. Just price the extra work in your hourly rate requirement and if the job does not meet that, then don’t apply for that job.

Freedom is not complicated.

Telling people they should get a better job implies that there is work where YOU think the workers deserve to be taken advantage of. Why IDK, guessing you hate people fighting for better quality of life through democratic norms.

People rightfully hating tech workers nowadays makes so much sense.

And you think after this legislation there will magically be MORE JOBS?

LOL

> If you've ever worked in hospitality or retail, you'll know that managers will call/contact you at all hours to make sure they have coverage. It's irritating.

I vaguely remember a few years ago there was some news pushing new scheduling software that was supposed to help make schedules more predictable, and how it wasn't working to full potential because store managers wouldn't trust it.

But I don't think the bill in question here would actually do anything to affect that issue?

You probably have been just lucky with your bosses?

Slack also works on weekends and at the AM

Your fortunate. If you’re adjacent to operations or power, after hours comms is a common experience.

Yes. And those are hard working people who decided that that was a good trade off and took the job (as opposed to the legislator who other than “editing” had not had a job before she took on the job of highly paid politician).

This is a stupid rebuttal. Society is allowed to improve the life work workers while working. Just because you want people to personally suffer doesn't make it right.

This is some old school puritan classism right here.

“ because you want people to personally suffer”

I never said I want people to suffer. I think your position is stupid because it will cause suffering through layoffs.

Very rarely has government intervention worked recently. But I guess you think these workers are stupid too and can’t take care of themselves.

Just get off their backs, I promise you they can handle without your performative outrage.

“ Society is allowed to improve the life work workers while working” This is not society doing anything. This is literally a politician that is advocating for government intervention in the economy.

Not always.

I found myself in a job with golden handcuffs that made it difficult to leave, which went from the best job of my life to a nightmare on earth when a key leader passed away and replaced by someone whose sociopathy was one of his better attributes.

His insane pace put my boss in the hospital from the stress.

As an employer (in the US) I have always had the impression that I'd risk being on the hook for overtime or some other form of additional compensation if I routinely engaged in communication with employees out of hours, so unless the place was on fire I never did. As an "employee" (contractor) I managed my own hours and adopted a pragmatic approach: if the client was paying $$$ I'd respond if it didn't interfere with my personal life, unless they were being dickish about it, in which case I'd bring it up as an issue and if necessary drop the client.

Loads of jobs where this is expected: sales, education, hospitality, definitely the entertainment industry, etc.