Grindr Illegally Used RTO to Thwart Union, Forced Out 1/2 of Staff, NLRB Alleges
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
usually this is doing things like making hours worse, enforcing rules more strictly, etc. in response to a union campaign. but they can also get in trouble for positive things like relaxing rules, giving raises, etc. and in a few funny cases they can even get in trouble for supporting the union.
in other words, if Grindr had, in response to unionization efforts, decided to placate employees by expanding WFH, they could have gotten in trouble in the exact same way.
RTO, after years of hiring remote only positions, IS changing an employee's work location. Grindr employees worked from home 5 days a week, across the US. Then the RTO would make engineers move to Chicago and go into an office 2 times a week. In what world is this RTO not changing employee's work location?
You don't have to be a genius to figure out that hiring fully remote means you will get workers all over the US. The executives knew that, were counting on that, and have benefited a lot from that. I don't think you should be able to get away with an "erm, akshually" level technicality.
There's precident for "we're transferring you to the Chicago office, Bob" and Bob would just pack up the family from wherever they were living and move. This was common in the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s at least for white collar jobs.
It's a consistently downward trend: https://www.freddiemac.com/sites/g/files/ynjofi111/files/sty...
My completely uninformed assumption is that this (inverse) graph has something to do with it, since anybody who finds a “good thing” in any region would be increasingly unlikely to want to give it up: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/USSTHPI
Also protected activities.
Trying to mask a layoff by taking actions that mostly affect the group they're trying to layoff... is an illegal layoff. See: https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/cal-warnact.html
And, california has shown repeatedly that they're perfectly willing to enforce cal-WARN on companies that barely have a CA presence... never-mind ones that have their HQ there. Yes, this includes layoffs that don't touch a CA resident.
“The labor board can order companies to change policies and reinstate employees with backpay, but it lacks the authority to force companies to pay punitive damages or hold executives personally liable for violations” - The angry primate part of my brain might want more (they were REALLY blatant about their union busting), but I’ll take it.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/04/grindr-users-see...
I wonder why the other big apps don't use their own tech to make a separate gay hookup app. The only thing I can see, other than possibly anti-gay bias, is that they see the market as not being worthwhile financially due to other reasons.
also it's a bit disingenuous to call grindr a dating app, it's almost purely a sex hookup app but they would rather pretend it's something else entirely.
Sucks that it still feels like a necessary evil just due to its user base. I continue to have conflicted feelings on paying for xtra. I hate it, but it's such a horrible experience without it.
In fact, some are very popular, like Tinder and Hinge. But they don't swallow up Grindr, because Grindr is still the place with the most gay men. The value of the app is 90% in that.
There is SOME merit to it, too. Certainly, being closeted is easier on Grindr versus Tinder/Hinge, and that might describe the majority of gay men. Grindr also gives the user much, much more control and information. You don't have to swipe, you can just approach, like you're at a bar.
Many just because they don't want too, or don't want to manage more than 1 app.
We also see several new apps spring up and just never gain traction.
It has developed a stronghold because most still use it, and that likely just isn't changing anytime soon.
If enough people don’t use it, than people will just download it and see that no one uses it and never open it again.
Really the only other app with a serious enough use is Scruff. By nearly every metric it is a better app and does some really good things. But even being on both and basically bouncing between the 2 most of my conversations end up on Grindr.
There is another web app that has gained serious traction for offering a… unique value proposition but I am purposefully not going to name it here so someone doesn’t look it up and see something they don’t want to see. (I will just say there is a reason it’s a web app instead of an actual app)
I still think, if there was an app that was completely free, and optimized for cost reduction with very unobtrusive ads, it could get somewhere. Right now the pricing levels are atrocious, and there's a scratch for the people to stop using it because of it, in addition to hostile UX.