Remote Walmart employees across the United States are now questioning the company’s newly implemented in-person work policy. Some employees who have been ordered to relocate are even considering resigning.

In May, Walmart mandated that hundreds of remote workers relocate to its corporate headquarters in Bentonville, Arkansas, or its other hubs in Hoboken, New Jersey, and Northern California. A recent Bloomberg report revealed that employees opposed the return-to-office mandate during a company-wide Zoom call, with some resigning.

During the call, one participant described the RTO policy as “a bunch of bullsh-t.” In contrast, others expressed concerns about the challenges of living in Arkansas, childcare arrangements, increased workload, and the potential impact on their partners’ careers due to the relocation.

A Walmart employee informed Bloomberg that he decided to resign from the company rather than relocate on such short notice. According to the report, employees unable to relocate must terminate their employment with the company between August 2024 and January 2025.

  • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    125
    ·
    3 months ago

    Being forced to relocate like that should constitute a contract renegotiation and these folks should get severance and unemployment.

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      3 months ago

      They can deff get unemployment as this is a constructive dismissal but severance in most states is purely regulated by contract.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      My job just moved to the headquarters, so I quit. The company did indeed offer $20,000 to move me and, if not, 2-months severance and benefits, with my PTO used first and paid in full. Also, the contract stated there would be no issue with me filing for unemployment after severance is over. That’s how it should be done.

      I can’t blame them in my case. Since a large chunk of my duties involved shipping and troubleshooting hardware, it makes sense to have someone available to come in once or twice a week.

      Anybody got any remote IT positions? I can send a resume. If you DM me, I’ll not likely see it. Reply here and I’ll get with you.

        • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          Bad advice if they’re in IT. City/state IT frequently struggles to keep good talent, because they often pay less than 50 or 60% of market rate for IT positions. The only reason to consider it is if you’re looking for a retirement package. But even then, you’ll likely need to stay for 5’ish years to get vested in the state retirement system. State/city lawmakers really hate investing in IT staff.

          • SendMePhotos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Oh dang. I was told by a city worker that the it for city/state is decent and in demand.

            Most people are reluctant to invest in safety/security as they don’t technically make money. I’d label IT as a part of security.

    • BCsven@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      3 months ago

      Not sure of US law, but in Canada something like this would be considered Constructive Dismissal, so you resign and they legally owe you termination pay and severence pay based on position amd years served

      • Wiz@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        3 months ago

        In US law, workers can generally be terminated for “any reason or no reason.”

    • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s constructive dismissal, and they can 100% file for unemployment even though they “resigned”. Basically, Walmart is laying them off of their old WFH position, and is offering them a new in-office position. And if the new position isn’t on-par with what they were already doing, they aren’t required to accept it. They can refuse the worse job offer and file for unemployment (because they were laid off of their old job) instead.

      To be clear: Walmart will 100% contest their unemployment claim. But if the worker appeals and provides proof of the constructive dismissal, they’ll win and get unemployment back paid to when they first filed. If your employer ever drastically and negatively changes your job description (like cutting your hours, cutting your pay, suddenly requiring in-office, etc,) you should be in the unemployment line to file that same day.

    • Zipitydew@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      3 months ago

      Sad thing is the Bentonville area is rather nice. Because the Walton kids have dumped a bunch of money into it. Whole state could be just as nice if Arkansas would tax those assholes effectively.

        • Zipitydew@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          lol I’ve only visited on business trips. Seemed nice. Have heard like everywhere people are now getting priced out.

          • Glimpythegoblin @lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Oh yeah dude it’s nuts. I’m having to move out of town next year to even consider owning a house. Houses that were $170k are $400k now.

      • jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I live in Bella Vista and absolutely love it. There’s plenty to hate about this state. Most of it related to politics. But the Northwest Arkansas area is beautiful and an overall nice place to live.

        That said, I’ve avoided Walmart like the plague because they’re a notoriously shitty place to work. Of course that’s not exactly a secret.

  • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    3 months ago

    I have been seeing Walmart trying to recruit high end professionals to relocate to their HQ in Bentonville… why would anyone do such a thing?

    You can live in a major city where if you lose or don’t like your job, you get another one for more money. OR

    Live in a company town where you can get a good job from the company. Do these execs and clown HR really think anyone would go for this idiotic deal lol

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Ex took my kids to Arkansas, my mom lived there and I used to live next door in Tulsa. I have very little issue living here in the Deep South, but I would not move to Arkansas.

      Funny note: The 01/06 insurrectionist with his feet on Pelosi’s desk? That was mom’s neighbor. The mayor was on TV saying he didn’t want people thinking they were all racist assholes like Bigo. LOL NO! My mom was a hardcore racist and even she hated the guy.

    • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      I stopped shopping there about 10 years ago. My wife occasionally argues that we should go there and I have to launch into my tirade again about what an evil company they are. That’s not even considering how everything they sell is absolute shit. Not a single thing in the store is what it masquerades as on the slightly altered label.

      • technomad@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Been fighting this fight for a while. It’s like everyone I’ve ever said something to in real life doesn’t understand. It’s nice to know I’m not the only one. Lol

        • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 months ago

          Some people don’t have a choice. When we were really poor, we shopped there even though I hated it, because we literally couldn’t afford to shop anywhere else. But as soon as I started making better money I completely boycotted them. Other people are just really apathetic to anything that doesn’t directly impact them in the immediate present. And then of course there are plenty of less than intelligent people who just don’t get it, like you said.

          • technomad@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            I try to be understanding for those people, and I was also one of those people at one point. I also didn’t know any better when I was younger.

    • LifeOfChance@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 months ago

      They cost to much. We saw it a year ago they’ll let these position become vacant then hire for much less. They knew by doing this it would happen.

      • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        they cost too much short term, they only care about quarterly or maybe yearly profits, whether they make profits in the coming decade is only relevant in that it keeps people on board for now.

  • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    3 months ago

    Worth noting that employees forced into similar situations should file for unemployment even though they resigned. It’s called constructive dismissal, which is basically when the company restructures your job and drastically changes it in some way. Like, for instance, changing your position from WFH to in-office, or cutting you from full time to part time.

    From a legal standpoint, it is the same as them laying you off from your old job and offering you a new one with a modified job description. But if the new job position isn’t on par with what you were already doing, you don’t have to accept it and can file for unemployment instead.

  • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    3 months ago

    “Some employees who have been ordered to relocate are even considering resigning.“

    Shows you what side the media is on.

    If my employer asked me to literally abandon the home and life i have build to move to some backwater where they cant find enough employees. I am responding with a wrongful termination lawsuit because a demand so outrageous can only be an attempt to bully me in resignation. I refuse to believe anyone considers such reasonable if at all a demand made with human dignity and respect, which it does not.

    I work to maintain my life, i am not living to maintain a business that would fire me on a whim if they so please. Like what the fuck are they thinking.

    • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      Industry average these days is ~25-50% turnover when it’s just a return to office mandate. As in, no relocation, just adding a daily commute.

      Relocation has always been 99% turnover. Very few people are ever willing to spend not only their lives, but those of their family, just for a job.

      This isn’t really any different than Tesla or Disney moving offices that were in the news recently. It’s a mildly disguised layoff, and they will hire new (probably fewer) staff at the new office.

  • Kalysta@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    3 months ago

    They talk to like the one dude happy about the relocation. What about everyone else who doesn’t want to live in fucking Arkansas.

    As a woman, you couldn’t pay me enough to live in a red state these days.

  • RBG@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    3 months ago

    Yeah well, didn’t it come out long time already that the company who does this just wants you to quit, so they don’t have to fire you. Another exploitation of workers.

  • ComradeSharkfucker
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Forcing workers to relocate is just a way of laying them off by making them quit

    • scutiger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s called constructive dismissal. They’re not technically firing anyone, but they are trying to make the work conditions unfavorable so that people quit. Many places will allow you to get unemployment, and often also severance pay, if you can show that this is what’s happening.

  • NutWrench
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 months ago

    You can’t collect unemployment benefits if you resign. Make them fire you.

    • scutiger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      Constructive dismissal often still allows collecting unemployment. Possibly even severance in some places.