Remix clone Hacker News

It depends on the state, but you don’t have to prove intent, you have to prove that the conditions of your job changed enough that it is an unreasonable burden.

If they transfer you to a location that requires an additional hour of commuting, you just have to prove that the commute takes an extra hour.

▲

rdtsc a day ago | parent [-]

> If they transfer you to a location that requires an additional hour of commuting, you just have to prove that the commute takes an extra hour.

Oh that’s easy to prove. But then what? Does your employment contract prohibit commutes.

▲

dghlsakjg 9 hours ago | parent [-]

No. The government authority in charge of employment decides whether that change is enough of a change of the original job that it constitutes constructive dismissal.

If so, you can quit your job and are eligible for unemployment and any other legal benefits of having been fired without cause, and a claim is put against the employers account in the unemployment system.

▲

rdtsc 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Oh for unemployment sure, but the claim here is that the person hired under a DEI initiative is now let go, but under a different scheme of “restructuring”. Now their job would be to find redress and either reverse that or win monetary damages. It’s not impossible but it’s an uphill battle unless someone find a written directive somewhere a red flag. Or all the terminated employees somewhere coordinate to prove a particular pattern.

	▲	dghlsakjg 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I wasn’t commenting on that case. Constructive dismissal is irrelevant in that instance if you have been let go since you don’t have to prove that your job was changed if it no longer exists. Also, it is perfectly legal to terminate someone in most of the US under a restructure. My original response was just pointing out that proving constructive dismissal doesn’t have to do with the intent of the employer, merely the effect of those actions. In your original example the employer can’t pretend that asking someone to commute to Alaska three days a week is reasonable and therefore they weren’t fired without cause when they refuse to do that.