this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2024
336 points (96.7% liked)

Asklemmy

43962 readers
1491 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

She had interviewed and met both remotely and in person, this guy was merely an HR drone confirming her documentation. I was a little bent when she told me he had asked her to remove her blur filter "to have a look at her working environment, make sure it's not cluttered" (something along those lines). No one else at this company requested such. Was he way out of line?

I should note, this is my PC in our living room and not where she will be working from. And this guy wants a look around our home?! Told my wife to bring this up once she's settled in, ask HR if this is policy. She started today!

She thinks it's a racism thing. I'm not so sure, but I don't have any other explanation.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 208 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Uh, I hire a lot of remote people, and have been remote for a long time. That is absolutely not fucking normal. I'm not going to say racism/poor/or anything, but I will say asshole behavior and huge red flag.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 85 points 3 months ago (5 children)

I've been remote the past 5 years as well. I've never heard of anyone, anywhere, for any reason being asked to un-blur video. Customers, vendors, coworkers, everyone does it. In fact, I consider it more professional, and certainly less distracting to do so unless you background is 100% work dedicated. Hence my post.

[–] primrosepathspeedrun@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago (2 children)

okay but consider that you don't have as much surveilance of your employees, and without that, how are you supposed to discipline them?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] tacticalsugar@lemmy.blahaj.zone 131 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

It sure sounds like racism and poorphobia to me. HR trying to make sure her surroundings don't look like what a "typical poor person" would have (clutter, children, signs of disability, "drugs", etc.) It's not super common, but it's common enough that I hear about it every so often.

I can't offer any kind of legal advice, but it sounds like this job will be potentially problematic and HR will definitely be one to watch out for.

ETA: There's a lot of paranoia in the US right now about "laptop farms". Remote jobs are paranoid about people getting remote work to send money back to North Korea. It's completely ridiculous, and it's causing issues for a lot of people, mostly marginalized people. I think it's useful context to know why this kind of thing is happening more lately.

[–] LazaroFilm@lemmy.world 51 points 3 months ago (2 children)

This could be raised as discrimination. Not only regarding income, but could also be against disabilities. People with ADHD (hello it’s me!) are really bad at organizing, especially desks and work areas (I work in layers of papers like sedimentation). I would definitely take notes on this incident and if it continues or if he job gets changed following.

[–] tacticalsugar@lemmy.blahaj.zone 38 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (4 children)

Definitely! However if your first experience with HR is being discriminated against, raising concerns about discrimination can be dangerous. Who do you go to when HR is causing the issues? HR is there to protect the company, not you. If the easiest way to protect the company is to fire someone, HR will probably do that.

I'm not trying to talk OP or anyone else out of going to HR, they aren't always sharks waiting to fire someone. It's just good to be careful here and OP and their wife should be aware of the risks before taking any action. Definitely document this incident. If this becomes a repeat issue, documentation can be the difference between getting fired and winning a wrongful termination lawsuit.

[–] LazaroFilm@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago

That’s why I said keep notes. Recount the event with timestamp. If things continue or get worse you now have a file with all occurrences. And if you get fired for calling out HR, that’s an easy lawsuit.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 11 points 3 months ago (1 children)

HR can protect the company by reigning this guy in. I really feel it was a lone wolf thing, not policy.

I'd like to approach them anonymously, but it might be obvious who I was talking about.

HR can protect the company by reigning this guy in. I really feel it was a lone wolf thing, not policy.

Very true! Like I said, I'm not trying to convince you to not bring it up, just that it's something to be careful about, and to make sure you have evidence or documentation.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] seaQueue@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Ah the sedimentary filing system. I can tell you exactly when I last touched each layer of each pile and what's there but if I file it all away somewhere I can't tell you shit.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] clif@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

There was a big headline recently about a tech company accidentally hiring a North Korean "hacker" (I'm just going off the headline) so that might be fresh in memory with regards to your laptop farm reference.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

If I hadn't seen the blatant discrimination she's faced job hunting, I'd be more skeptical. She's Filipino, but that's "Mexican" to many. When I say blatant, I mean to say heads would roll if we had some of this on camera. She's mostly unhurt by these things, just figures that's the way of the world. But damn. One lady asked if she was Asian and was visibly appalled. Another said she would have to attend their church, and barely stopped short of asking her to renounce Catholicism. There's much more I'm not remembering ATM.

What's shocking is that this employer is widely considered to be the best in the whole area. Solid pay and benefits, really cares about their people. My ex-wife worked there and loved them. I'm guessing their HR folks would have kittens if they knew this guy had pulled this.

Also, just read your edit, makes much more sense. Still, I would have said, "This is not where I will be working. If you want to pick this back up in 5, I can be in my home office." (We hadn't set up proper video cam or setup the laptop so I had her use my machine.)

Having said that, this is a hybrid position, so the laptop farm shouldn't be an issue. She'll be in 3 times a week.

I completely believe all of that, and I'm sorry she's had to deal with so much crap. Lately a lot of employers seem to be showing their asses by being overtly racist, ableist, and transphobic. Everyone I know who isn't a white straight cis man has had employment troubles in the last six months.

I hope this is just a strange interaction with one HR person and you have a better time with everyone else!

[–] InFerNo@lemmy.ml 58 points 3 months ago (1 children)

"Sorry, this is a shared office and my partner is working under NDA"

[–] booly@sh.itjust.works 21 points 3 months ago (2 children)

No such thing as an NDA that allows a spouse to work in the same room, and allows the spouse to actually be on video while blurred, but draws the line at not being able to unblur the video.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 17 points 3 months ago

There is and unfortunately I cannot show you the NDA as the NDA won't allow me to show you the NDA. The NDA does allow me talk about the conditions in general like this though.

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 13 points 3 months ago

It is it's the NDA you made your partner sign.

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 44 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Huge, HUGE red flag. Even without it being I9 stuff.

I have worked remotely for 8+ years at this point. Sometimes I don't even turn my camera on for meetings. It depends on a lot of factors. If my employer cared about any of that, they probably wouldn't be a good employer for remote work.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Anissem@lemmy.ml 30 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

You really shouldn’t hire a wife, that seems wrong

[–] bizarroland@fedia.io 6 points 3 months ago

I mean I bet he got a really good deal for it otherwise he wouldn't be bragging on the internet

[–] francisfordpoopola@lemmy.world 30 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

It seems like you are getting more knee jerk than actual answers here. There is no evidence of any discrimination in asking to deblur the camera by itself. It also has nothing to do with an I9 validation. The I9 validation is checking for employment eligibility and citizenship status and that's it. See below for the remote procedures. The employer's obligation is to be consistent in the procedure and not discriminatory with the procedure based on race, gender, etc. I just think that HR drone is a dumbass.

Lastly, I think based on your other response to another poster she should take the job and just be keenly aware if anyone else in HR asks other funny stuff. There can always be dumbasses in every department and that's not a reflection of their ability to be lawful or a bad company. I also think it's worth reporting the person if they keep doing funny stuff.

From USCIS: Remote Examination of Documents Procedures: Examine copies (front and back, if the document is two-sided) of Form I-9 documents or an acceptable receipt to ensure that the documentation presented reasonably appears to be genuine and relates to the employee; Conduct a live video interaction with the individual presenting the document(s) to ensure that the documentation reasonably appears to be genuine and relates to the individual. The employee must first transmit a copy of the document(s) to the employer (per Step 1 above) and then present the same document(s) during the live video interaction; and Retain a clear and legible copy of the documentation (front and back if the documentation is two-sided).

Link https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/remote-examination-of-documents

[–] tophneal@sh.itjust.works 13 points 3 months ago

the HR drone could've probably explained it better, but it's possible for the background blur effect to distort a close up img on camera of a document, such as for I9. I recently went through a verification of my documents and had to do the same thing, except I made the call to unblur and immediately my docs were verifiable via camera.

Likely policy is to ask for blur effects to be disabled to remove the possibility of interference in be able to actually see/verify docs.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

that HR drone is a dumbass

My take as well, and thanks for taking the time for a real answer.

[–] sumguyonline@lemmy.world 27 points 3 months ago (3 children)

There was just a news article about US corporations hiring North Koreans for remote work unintentionally, and the north Koreans then did a sabotage and stole secrets... Strikes me as HR is freaking out across the board and they were looking to confirm you aren't actually based in a foreign country. It is very easy to hide where you are(phone numbers can be forwarded, addresses can be false). If it's a 1 time thing, not racism, if they consistently single her out, is there anyone else of her race being singled out? Did HR maybe get a derogatory report from someone that doesn't like her and they wanted to see if she was sober? That's happened to me.

[–] thepreciousboar@lemm.ee 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

That is the reason why identification documents are needed. How can they hire people without knowing who they are?

[–] TheBest@midwest.social 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

NK stole the identity of other Americans. They dotted i's and crossed t's to get into knowb4 via social engineering. Really fucked up.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] zcd@lemmy.ca 23 points 3 months ago (2 children)
[–] Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] zcd@lemmy.ca 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 3 months ago

I initially read it as someone saying 'Arab' in a stereotypical Southern drawl, and I was confused.

[–] sudo_shinespark@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I don’t know if they’re all bastards, but HR is absolutely not your friend. Human Resources <> protections for employees. Instead, Human Resources = protection for the company

[–] bizarroland@fedia.io 10 points 3 months ago

Technically anything that is a "resource" for a company is something that is meant to be exploited for profit.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone 20 points 3 months ago

I was a little bent when she told me he had asked her to remove her blur filter "to have a look at her working environment, make sure it's not cluttered" (something along those lines).

Creepy.

[–] hoshikarakitaridia@lemmy.world 14 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Is this the US? Because iirc there's some workplace injury stuff in some EU countries, where the company might be liable and so they might need to advise you to do certain things to prevent injury if you work remotely.

Not trying to take the wind out of your sails, just making ppl aware.

[–] Unleaded8163@fedia.io 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Same thing in Canada. When we transitioned to fully remote we had to ensure that our workspace is safe.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] perviouslyiner@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

... except they ask you for a photo in the other direction, showing your chair and desk and keyboard. And not by surprise, just "send us a picture sometime for the audit."

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] invertedspear@lemm.ee 13 points 3 months ago (4 children)

I’m not sure what was going on, but a clear background can tell you a lot about a person. I’ve had a few interviewees that applied for US work with no sponsorship turn out to be not already in the US. Pretty sure they were trying to fake it long enough to get us to agree to sponsorship, or overlook the fact they weren’t in the US. The interviewees were both caught because of details in the background during the interview process. Weather and time of day outside the windows not matching where they claimed to live was one, the other was architecture that would be very atypical in a US home.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Excuse me sir. I can’t help but notice the Eiffel Tower out your window. Are you sure you’re calling from the US?

[–] filcuk@lemmy.zip 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Reporting from Las Vegas, babyyy
*spins a roulette *

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] sevan@lemmy.ca 11 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Long before Covid, the company I worked for started trialing work from home for some call center agents. They had a whole list of requirements for an acceptable work from home space: dedicated work area with a desk, locking file drawer (why??? I don't know), first aid kit, fire extinguisher, etc. Someone would actually go out to physically inspect the space to make sure every box was checked.

My guess is someone from legal wrote up the requirements from a workplace safety standpoint. They probably could have just had the employee sign a statement agreeing that they met all of the requirements, but someone in the middle got overzealous about their role. During Covid, everyone got sent home permanently without any regard to any of those rules, so clearly they weren't that important in the first place.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] solrize@lemmy.world 11 points 3 months ago

My I-9 verification is birth certificate, so no photo. Not sure how unblurring would help? I've never done it remotely though. Wanting to see work environment isn't so great. I set up for a video interview a while back by carefully positioning the camera so there was nothing interesting around or behind me. I had trouble getting the video working though, so we did a voice-only phone interview instead, which was much better anyway.

[–] feoh@lemmy.ml 10 points 3 months ago

Post pandemic, this kind of ID "verification" is SUPER bogus, but it's quite common unfortunately, and, tbh, I can't think of a better way to handle it that isn't either in person or via snail mail.

Not great for sure, but most likely not racist, or at least not purposefully so (not that that matters).

I wouldn’t call that kosher, personally.

[–] nudnyekscentryk@szmer.info 9 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Why does she think it's a racism thing?

[–] Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone 24 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (14 children)

No one else at this company requested such. Was he way out of line?

People who experience discrimination develop a sense for when someone is othering them. It's not always correct, because it involves intuition, and you can misread people. But will still develop a sense for it.

Now, apply this to OP's wife. OP says this about her:

If I hadn't seen the blatant discrimination she's faced job hunting, I'd be more skeptical. She's Filipino, but that's "Mexican" to many. When I say blatant, I mean to say heads would roll if we had some of this on camera. She's mostly unhurt by these things, just figures that's the way of the world. But damn. One lady asked if she was Asian and was visibly appalled. Another said she would have to attend their church, and barely stopped short of asking her to renounce Catholicism. There's much more I'm not remembering ATM.

[–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 7 points 3 months ago (4 children)

OP should consider screen-recording her zoom calls.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] biscuitswalrus@aussie.zone 8 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Hmm, so, policy in our office is a clean desk. Before you jump to conclusions, it's because our secured area and office occasionally has people come through that should absolutely not see what information we have on our desks. This requirement is a compliance issue for our continued contracts and certifications.

Our work from home policy hasn't addressed this issue, but it sounds like it's a clear gap. Your neighbour coming around for a cup of tea absolutely should not be able to see any work related information.

My assumption is that someone has considered this kind of aspect and had a check to confirm that they've done diligence by asking you to reveal your working space. A space the companies sensitive information would be visible. Actually you too should maybe not be looking at your wife's screen nor materials on her work desk. Depending on the situation.

Either way, policy comes first so perhaps her employment agreement or employee handbook would reveal more.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] primrosepathspeedrun@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

...cluttered? the fuck?

has this fucker seen a cubicle? why did she allow it?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next β€Ί