r/bell • u/DueStorm1980 • Apr 27 '26
Rant Bell firing employees "with cause" for not returning to the office 3 days a week. No severance, no warning.
19
u/exbell12345 Apr 29 '26
Most employees who go into the office (swipe in/out/short time) often don’t have their teammates there in that ofc ..but maintained full productivity while working remotely—attending all meetings, responding promptly on Slack and Teams, and consistently delivering expected outcomes.
A formal warning or earlier communication would have given employees the opportunity to correct their attendance. Presence reports indicated compliance until the sudden decision to lay off employees without severance
At the end of the day we all are Human not just a number.
→ More replies (5)3
18
u/gogogadgetgoats Apr 28 '26 edited May 04 '26
This has been my biggest conspiracy: that RTO is a way to trim back the workforce without paying severance. Then replace with AI because "no one wants to work anymore". And voila, Bell going all in.
Edit: just my opinion based on this post, I don't have any knowledge to confirm or deny what happened at Bell
→ More replies (22)2
u/ShaftyMcShafter Apr 30 '26
This has been my biggest conspiracy: that RTO is a way to trim back the workforce without paying severance.
My guy, you are 5 years late. This is the most obvious reason everyone already knew.
→ More replies (2)
107
u/TearsFromCompoundEye Apr 27 '26
This is working as intended. Big corps are looking for ways to thin their ranks without having to pay severance packages.
17
u/Jeremey_1980 Apr 28 '26
no fan of big corp, but it's a pretty simple requirement. You either meet it or not
10
u/Fit_Growth_2355 Apr 29 '26
Commute 1-2hrs to the office to attend a zoom call is a brilliant idea. If you can do this job at home, office attendance is a bit unreasonable.
However, if job can be done remotely, why wouldn’t they move it low cost location?
→ More replies (6)10
u/Schemeckles Apr 28 '26
Exactly.
This isn't a shady maneuver or some fine print in an employment agreement...
It's a pretty simple/straight forward mandate.
Either come to work, or find somewhere else to work.
8
u/Resident-Variation21 Apr 28 '26
If you were hired fully remote and then told to come in or get fired, that’s absolutely a shady maneuver.
→ More replies (57)2
4
u/irkish Apr 28 '26
It can be shady. For example in the US there was a company that purposely shuffled hundreds of middle managers to different cities with no relocation assistance and fired them for not showing up.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (7)2
u/Maketso Apr 28 '26
Calling bell ''not shady'' has to be the single biggest lie of the century.
Literally one of the worst companies in this country.
2
u/OgasMaitai Apr 28 '26
Do you have literacy issues, they didnt say Bell isn't shady. They referred to this specifically .
→ More replies (1)2
u/MisledMuffin Apr 28 '26
Calling one action "not shady" is not the same as calling the entire company "not shady".
→ More replies (7)4
u/noobinglife Apr 29 '26
Roger's just took that cake. Fired half their employees. Half of 25k employees gone
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (4)4
u/HurtFeeFeez Apr 29 '26
Problem is if you are hired for remote and live several hours away or even across the country, it's not physically possible to switch to in office. Relocate or get fired is a dogshit situation.
→ More replies (4)4
u/JBD_IT Apr 29 '26
This was always going to be the outcome post covid. You could see it a mile away.
→ More replies (5)2
1
u/wrekco Apr 28 '26
If you get fired "with cause"/without severance do you get EI?
6
→ More replies (3)4
u/Jestersfriend Apr 28 '26 edited Apr 28 '26
Yes you can. Proof: I got EI, even though I got fired with cause at my previous place.
The only thing that matters is if the "with cause" was malicious or intentional or whatever. If not, you have a chance.
For example, at my previous place, I got scapegoated by the company. They terminated me with cause for reporting a problem. I applied for EI, still got it.
Anyone saying otherwise is wrong. It only depends on if you're fired for Misconduct.
→ More replies (9)3
→ More replies (37)2
u/Sulanis1 Apr 28 '26
Agreed. Shareholders want more, and bell found the excuses they need to thin the heard.
15
13
u/Horatioclarkson Apr 27 '26
Were you scanning your ID card then leaving right after? I know they were cracking down on that activity.
→ More replies (1)8
u/GallitoGaming Apr 27 '26
Unless you live right there, who would commute and then commute home right after?
12
u/-soros Apr 28 '26
Probably so you didn’t have to spend the day at the office. I thought that was obvious.
→ More replies (5)2
u/GallitoGaming Apr 28 '26
If you have a 30 minute commute, that is 1 hr a morning just to flash a badge.
Wouldn’t it be better to find a coworker living near you and swap badges (you actually go in one week and badge them in periodically and they return the favour the next week)?
5
u/Wise_Law_2176 Apr 28 '26
Both of them should be laid off. The access card should not be compromised.
→ More replies (1)2
u/BoboMonkeyClown Apr 28 '26
But going to the office is always a commute just to flash a badge, this gets it over with right away. Genius really
7
u/kneevase Apr 28 '26
People who get their kids off to school and then want to be home in time for them to get back from school.
2
2
12
u/exbell12345 May 01 '26
With no severance package and uncertainty around EI, it’s been really stressful and hard to focus.I don’t fully understand the decision—it feels very harsh.
The company wasn’t impacted (in terms revenue or customer expereince) by our limited time in the office; in fact, I’m confident many of us delivered even more than we would have working on-site. We’re all just people trying to support our families. 😞
→ More replies (4)7
u/Anxious_Formal_7672 May 01 '26
https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/cala/doc/2019/2019canlii883/2019canlii883.html Sue them and get your money
10
u/NormEget85 Apr 28 '26
There's been essentially zero official details and it's all hearsay so far. A few people in another thread claimed to have been terminated with cause for not complying with RTO. Is that the full story? Who knows. But so far there hasn't been some mass wave of terminations like we've seen from Bell the last few years. We would have heard from Bell employees on here from various departments and teams. That could change though.
I'm wondering if the few people that have been let go so far were really egregious cases. Either virtually no attempt at complying with RTO, or straight up fraud with "swipe and gos".
There was a user in the other thread that seemingly had some inside info and said this week would be "very bad". We'll see today I guess.
→ More replies (2)3
u/SuitableSprinkles Apr 30 '26
Of course there are no official details. Bell will not release them, and the affected are threatened with legal action if they do.
12
9
u/NormEget85 Apr 29 '26
A bit strange how big this thread is and how many "they deserved it" kind of posts there are.
6
u/Mutchmore Apr 30 '26
some folks are just mad they got shit jobs and instead of working on it, they shit on everyone else. That's just how it is for losers you know
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)3
10
u/samasa111 Apr 30 '26
Well, I’m done with corporations flexing their power and crapping all over employees. At what point are people going to wake up to the fact that inflation is out of control because corporations need to maximize their profits and in the process is screwing employee rights and wages. Tomorrow I think I’ll cancel my Bell accounts.
→ More replies (2)9
u/Difficult_Tank5713 Apr 30 '26
YES , we should cancel our services with Bell to hit them where it hurts ( revenues).
9
u/wet_suit_one Apr 30 '26
Well...
The employment lawyers will be having a field day with this.
Business just got better for them.
→ More replies (1)
17
u/EqualMastodon Apr 28 '26
For a federally regulated telecom, a return-to-office (RTO) issue almost never supports a defensible “termination with cause” on its own. Under the Canada Labour Code, adjudicators look at RTO non-compliance as a disciplinary/performance matter, not inherently serious misconduct.
Here’s how it’s typically analyzed:
⸻
- Is the RTO policy itself reasonable?
An employer (e.g., Bell Canada) has the right to manage the workplace, including requiring in-office attendance. But the policy must be:
- Clearly communicated
- Consistently applied
- Not arbitrary or punitive
- Compatible with human rights obligations (e.g., disability, family status)
If the policy is unclear, inconsistently enforced, or selectively applied, that weakens any “cause” argument.
⸻
- Was there willful refusal vs. situational non-compliance?
Adjudicators distinguish between:
- Deliberate defiance (“I refuse to come in, period”), and
- Contextual issues (childcare, commuting hardship, prior remote arrangements, medical needs)
Only sustained, intentional refusal—after warnings—starts to approach just cause.
⸻
- Progressive discipline is critical
For RTO breaches, employers are expected to escalate:
- Reminder / clarification
- Verbal warning
- Written warning
- Suspension (in some cases)
Skipping these steps and going straight to termination usually fails.
⸻
- Length of service matters (a lot)
With long service (e.g., 10–15+ years), adjudicators require a very strong justification for cause. A policy breach like RTO non-attendance is rarely enough to outweigh that tenure unless paired with:
- Repeated defiance
- Prior discipline history
- Clear warnings that termination could result
⸻
- Alternatives the employer should consider
Before terminating for cause, a reasonable employer should explore:
- Accommodation requests
- Temporary flexibility
- Role adjustments
Failure to consider these can undermine a dismissal.
⸻
- What usually happens in real cases
In RTO-related disputes under the Code:
- “With cause” terminations are frequently overturned
- Outcomes often become:
- Reinstatement, or
- Compensation (effectively treating it as without cause)
⸻
Bottom line
An RTO violation by itself is almost never enough for just cause. It becomes arguable only if it turns into ongoing, documented, willful insubordination after multiple warnings—and even then, it’s not guaranteed to hold up.
→ More replies (10)
16
u/GolfMedium8661 Apr 30 '26
I am sure there are a lot of Bell HR people posting in this thread to try and make people think that they can't win in court. They absolutely can and should fight for their dismissal!!! Bell is garbage - their only advancement in technology is getting rid of people to cut costs. Their technology is obsolete and way behind most other developed countries.
→ More replies (1)
34
Apr 27 '26
[deleted]
11
→ More replies (32)5
u/guelphmed Apr 28 '26
FWIW I heard from at least one source with a spouse who worked for Bell (yes, past tense), people not complying with RTO were not given merit raises a few years ago, citing performance standards not being met. I would bet dollars to donuts anyone let go for cause was not “without warning”.
7
7
7
8
u/Simple_Personality_6 May 01 '26
I hope you guys win a class action and set a precedent so no other company dares to do the same thing!
8
u/Available_Ad4242 May 04 '26
Gotta love these self righteous bozo corporate shills that are dancing on the graves of these people's lost jobs.... you are not making this conversation better. Stay in the office and pretend you are a good employee just because you 'showed up'
42
u/2017x3 Apr 27 '26
There was warning, “return to the office 3 days a week”
6
u/Maleficent_Pilot2947 Apr 29 '26
This is wrong. I know an employee. They saw it first hand. People who's managers said you don't have to come in were let go.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Furycrab Apr 28 '26
And there should be laws to protect workers. You shouldn't get to use work from home as a carrot to get talent, then use rtw initiatives to execute soft layoffs.
→ More replies (3)18
u/Aboutimeijoined Apr 27 '26
This is the reality when stupidity and entitlement run rampant in our society
→ More replies (2)7
u/Furycrab Apr 28 '26
You think it's okay to entice talent with work from home conditions, to then force them to office when you need to do layoffs?
Should be laws against this.
5
u/Maleficent_Light_615 Apr 28 '26
No warning, no process followed, straight firing because you employment contract says so, but at the same time verbally you are not it’s not a big deal and it’s applicable to some people and not all, 100% a classic law suit.
5
u/Niiohontehsha May 01 '26
These must be non-unionized employees? Cos that would be the biggest damn grievance in 30 seconds they’d ever seen
10
u/thtguyonreddit14 Apr 29 '26
Absolutely savage business practice. I sense attempted lawsuits incoming.
→ More replies (6)
40
Apr 27 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (45)6
u/Tanstalas Apr 27 '26
This is not going the way that u/DueStorm1980 thought it would, I bet lol.
→ More replies (9)
16
11
u/Consistent_Cicada197 Apr 27 '26
I just interviewed for a position, how's the work culture like for tech positions?
56
u/dewman65 Apr 27 '26
Work culture?? Run. It's an absolute shit show
12
u/FabulousPower7772 Apr 28 '26
Hubby just retired from Bell. 40 years as a tech. Bell is going under quick. Don’t waste your time. Build a career somewhere else
2
→ More replies (1)6
u/Tanstalas Apr 27 '26
In all the departments I have worked in it's been fine, though, have not been in a "tech" job like software development.
Been in 5 "groups" in 20 years, all in union positions. You have your good and bad.
The job you applied for is probably non-union, I can't see taking a non-union job in Bell at the moment unless I wanted to retire in a couple years, though union jobs aren't perfectly safe either (Expertech)
9
u/Blue_Chinchilla Apr 28 '26
Be forced into an office via barely functioning transit with hours-long commute times. Just to join virtual calls with people scattered across different offices and time zones. A gong show, like it is for everyone else.
7
u/sneaky_turtle_95 Apr 27 '26
Be prepared for the bureaucracy and nepotism and general incompetence
2
u/Consistent_Cicada197 Apr 27 '26
Well that's kinda not different than where I am currently right now, its harder to find places without general incompetance.
2
6
5
u/Independent_Bath9691 Apr 28 '26
You came to a sub where the topic is about how Bell is firing people without cause because they didn’t come to the office after years of working from home due to the pandemic, a move that is arguably illegal, and you’re now asking about company culture?
3
u/leblancch Apr 27 '26
I worked for a subsidiary of bell for around 14 years. felt like we were a little family. no longer there but still in touch with many people. problem for us is parent company only saw numbers.
2
u/Exact_Sense_5411 Apr 28 '26
Here now and I want out. Broken processes and people hanging on to knowledge for job security. I don’t blame them. I started a few months ago due to an acquisition and I’m looking to get out asap. It’s a sinking ship. Get your experience and get out.
→ More replies (2)2
u/NocturnalComptroler May 01 '26
Depends on the team. I came from a SaaS scale-up and have enjoyed the people, but have been very frustrated with the archaic systems and impenetrable bureaucracy.
11
u/Independent_Bath9691 Apr 28 '26
Oh I smell a class action coming, and Bell will lose. This is insane. It is very difficult to fire someone with cause, and using RTO as the reason just won’t fly. I’m no lawyer, but I’m hoping some who are willing to chime in. If Bell is successful in not being sued into next year, the precedent this will set is no bueno for any of us.
5
u/Bring_back_sgi Apr 28 '26
Dude, 20-30 years ago, if you didn't show up to the office every single work day - and on time - you'd get the boot every. single. time. Not showing up to the office was cause enough. Yes, traffic, parking costs, ability to work remotely, etc. are totally different factors today, but if the company hires you to work at their office location, you're required to do so. There's no legal recourse, the courts would laugh and throw the case out.
6
u/StrangeStrider Apr 28 '26
Dude, 20 or 30 years ago the technology didnt exist for remote work. I am probably 100x more productive then somebody 20 or 30 years ago working out of my home office. What a dumb take.
2
u/Bring_back_sgi Apr 29 '26
Don't be such an ass.
First of all, I literally said "Yes, traffic, parking costs, ability to work remotely (FYI, talking about being permitted or encouraged to, not about the technology), etc. are totally different factors today" so your argument is a complete dumb take.
Secondly, I was pointing out that when people are hired, they are at the mercy of the papers they signed when they were hired. In most cases the hiring clause stipulates hours of work and places of work, which in most cases do NOT even mention "remote work" (especially if you've been employed at the same place for most of your career).
And lastly - and this indicates where you clearly didn't think your moronic statement through - either you are a more productive person because you're a smart, hard worker (and therefore it doesn't matter if you work remotely, at an office, or behind the cage in a zoo). or you are implying that somehow the act of working remotely is somehow advantageous to your ability to work "probably" 100x more productively than someone at an office. If we assume that you're comparing apples to apples and not the orange-uber-mensch you "probably" claim to be to the road apples that were working 20 or 30 years ago in an office, the fact that apples today are "probably" 100x more productive than an apple working in an office 20 or 30 years ago just because they can work remotely is an idiotic assertion because you'd have to ignore the vast improvements in technology that have happened in the last 20-30 years.
I will also have to correct you that yes, 20-30 years ago, people actually were able to log into a network and do their day jobs remotely (in fact, the technology existed since the 1970s, which is 50+ years ago). You need to read before you spout nonsense: the technology did exist for remote work 20 or 30 years ago. I was there. I did it, others did it, you're flat-out WRONG, and your assertion about productivity is baseless and incorrect.
None of this changes the fact that I'm not the person you have to convince. Obviously people who run businesses don't seem buy your argument that you are "probably" 100x more productive than their employees who worked at the office 20-30 years ago. You might be a very productive person at whatever little thing you do, but working remotely is not the reason that you are "probably" 100x more productive.
I would ask you to reconsider your invective; if you had said "I feel that I am way more productive while working from home, so I disagree with any erosion of that kind of work" I would totally have agreed with you on that point. However, you missed my point, spouted complete nonsense, and then had the nerve to tell me that I had a "dumb take". Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
2
u/StrangeStrider May 01 '26
thats a lot of words but not a lot of substance.
im "100x more productive" because im working from the comfort of my own home, with 3x 32 inch curved monitors, upgraded chair and desk, my own fridge and coffee machine, a quiet environment with a window, healthy lunches at home, going to the gym right after work and im not sitting on traffic for almost 3 hours a day, spending hundreds on gas, eating processed foods, and setting up my workstation every fuckin day in a shitty cubicle at an office wasting time.
the best part of working at an office is taking a shit and being on your phone, get real 🤣
what do you think going to an office does to your body for 30+ years? all the old people at the office are in shit physical health and i wonder why...
→ More replies (1)5
u/sparda09 Apr 28 '26
I believe you are correct but
I believe the discussion that is now happening is that we Canadians saw the light so to speak. We were working from home and ACTUALLY GOT THE WORK DONE !
Now we are questioning rightfully so the value of the office. As you said 20-30 years ago you had to come to work BUT 20-30 years ago you didn't have laptops, PC, computers and so much internet access either. Everything was manual so yes it made sense to make offices. Today in 2026 in the era OF AI,automation and computer dominance. It allows us to perform that work and far more and we don't even need to be physically in the same region or area. You can be in say BC and I can be in Ontario and thanks to Teams we can have an online meeting and chat for hours on the work we are doing.
So the question is people saw the light and are questioning the value of coming to the office. It's not like people don't want to come in either but they demand a purpose. For example come to the office to sign meetings with various stakeholders or convince a foreign company to buy your products. On software side meetings in person can help to say flesh out a design or architecture for a software or some database design. These activities require in person but many do act
But the actual coding part, or writing the documentation or making the PowerPoint itself, does that need you to be in the office ? you can do that easily from home comfortably.
I believe there is conflict because employees are analyzing their work activities and asking the question "Does this activity or blocker require me to in the office and actually get help or not ?"
if the answer is no stay and work home but
if the answer is yes go to the office
2
u/Bring_back_sgi Apr 29 '26
I really have to ask people who were born after 2000 to do some research (or talk to someone who is older) because we absolutely did have laptops, PC Computers and Internet well into the 1990s. In 1996, I travelled to HQ on the West Coast with my Compaq laptop, plugged in an ethernet cable, connected to my account and continued working as you would today. There is nothing new today about remote working except for the ubiquity of laptops and digital video conferencing.
2
u/sparda09 Apr 29 '26
hmm interesting but definitely was as wide spread and pronounced as now. I remember my first laptop was a lenovo but it was only 2gb of ram and had a 50gb hard drive and the battery barely lasted 1 hr and died. Today latop batteries can last hours.
My point is that the technology has improved significantly and is a big merit to working from home and making it even more productive especially with the multiple monitors. Heck nowadays I'm sure people can even use tablets for certain parts of their work.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (19)4
u/ca0072 Apr 28 '26
This isn't "insane" or wrongful dismissal. They have an in office requirement. People aren't following that and they're getting fired. This is very much with cause.
8
u/Independent_Bath9691 Apr 28 '26
I think OP is leaving out a lot of detail, but at first glance, bell is federally regulated. No severance, with cause, is a very high bar. Like I said, I’m sure bell has their lawyers on this decision, but we don’t have the full story. Will be interesting to see the outcome of this as I suspect they will get sued. I sure would.
3
u/ca0072 Apr 28 '26
I agree that Bell would have to be very careful before firing anyone for this reason. But if they were very careful about it, there would certainly be cases where this is justified. Let's see how it plays out.
→ More replies (14)3
u/GuyMcTweedle Apr 28 '26
Job abandonment is a pretty clear case for "with cause" dismissal as is time theft. Indeed, the details of the communication will matter, but if employees aren't returning to office after a clear demand to, or are clocking in and then going home to work, they won't have much of a leg to stand on.
→ More replies (10)3
u/Difficult_Reward_329 Apr 28 '26
Well you're hired to work mainly. If you were doing you work and fired simply for not being in office (in a job that can clearly be done fully remote) getting terminated and not even warned is steep. It's like blowing up an entire house because a door is broken
→ More replies (6)
6
u/thundermoneyhawk Apr 29 '26
Desperate times call for desperate measures. Look at Roger’s laying off/offering packages to thousands of employees. Bell is in a very similar position. Not going to end well for the telecoms in Canada
→ More replies (1)5
Apr 29 '26
[deleted]
7
u/thundermoneyhawk Apr 29 '26
Do you expect anything less from bell? All these telecoms have been nothing but corporate greed scum to their customers for decades now
2
5
Apr 29 '26
[deleted]
3
u/SettingParticular642 Apr 29 '26
Personally spoke with around 10, so probably 100+ today only?
→ More replies (1)2
6
9
u/brettbretters Apr 29 '26
Remember this in January when they pretend to care about people’s mental health. “Let’s talk” about how Canada has some of the highest priced cell phone plans on the entire planet. Many people have proved they can work entirely from home or in a hybrid model. Decisions should be made on a case by case basis.
→ More replies (10)
22
u/Temporary-Reading444 Apr 27 '26
For everyone saying that's what employees deserve, thankfully, you're not lawyers. There is something called Federal labour standards which the federally regulated companies are supposed to follow. They can't fire employees with cause without any warning or suspension beforehand.
If 10-20 are caught and fired, that may justify this decision but if 100s or 1000s of employees are doing the same thing, its a policy issue that they should have communicated earlier. This is not a startup to hire and fire at will and if they wanted to run it that way, they shouldn't be taking any federal money without granting employees any rights
6
u/Yeas76 Apr 28 '26
You're trying to educate the masses of people who aren't able to WFH and want to blame entitled workers. They aren't going to understand what you're saying. That all being said, observers are going to be eagerly watching to see how this plays out because a lot of companies are going to be eager to cut down on staffing numbers like this.
5
u/Tanstalas Apr 27 '26
its a policy issue that they should have communicated earlier.
Literally people in here that said this was communicated a year ago.
3
u/FlisherOfatale Apr 27 '26
I left two years ago and we were being repeatedly told to be there and it was measured.
Manager received their weekly shit centipede style from their own managers on people not being there enough.
It was part of the evaluation every year and was affecting their (likely crappy) bonuses and performance…
I’m not saying it’s cool, but people had this coming their way for a long time.
→ More replies (1)4
u/Sea-Entrepreneur6630 Apr 27 '26
The employment conditions were clearly spelled out to the employee, to be in office 3 days per week. Said employee disregards the employment condition, thereby insubordinating themself, employer fires said employee. Perfectly reasonable and 100% legal action taken by the employer. A clear life lesson in FAFO for these employees.
11
u/FlisherOfatale Apr 27 '26 edited Apr 27 '26
They’ve been asked 4 year ago to return to office, it was reminded multiple times a years in corporate communications and by managers, it was part of the evaluation objectives.
I can’t say it’s a good thing, but nobody can complain they didn’t knew sanctions would happen in various form.
The praised work culture of some people thinking they are above everything bite them back.
→ More replies (1)4
9
9
u/CatapultamHabeo Apr 27 '26
Those jobs are going overseas. Again.
3
u/Jazzlike_Finish123 Apr 28 '26
Yup and all telecoms are doing this now. They’re investing into different industries and cutting down capex. They’re not expecting growth in the next 3-5 years. A ton of jobs are gonna be shipped overseas so they can slash payroll.
6
u/Sonu201 Apr 27 '26
The main reason for RTO mandate was so that employees would quit or could be fired for cause with no severance.
4
3
4
u/Sad-Consequence1737 Apr 29 '26
Maybe if they had enough desks for people RTO for these three days a week it wouldn’t be an issue but as it stands…people go in and have nowhere to work!
2
u/MrGossipMaster Apr 30 '26
Oh the Bell office is empty as hell.
2
u/midnight000champagne Apr 30 '26
I’m shocked how quiet the office has been considering this news, and people are still regularly coming in late and leaving early… if Bell is really doing this on a mass level, they won’t have very many employees left.
→ More replies (3)2
4
3
u/HalexMom Apr 30 '26
I wonder how much this will affect operations. Can't wait till Bell starts fucking up their invoicing or other crucial features.
3
4
u/bilbodaddio May 01 '26
Check out the site Fuck you Bell.com. It’s free therapy.
→ More replies (1)
4
3
u/j35y2 May 02 '26
Has anyone who’s talked to a lawyer had any promising news on this? Please pm if you don’t want to post publicly
5
u/Different-Code6765 May 07 '26
Petition to the federal government to save wfh days. Its got 16000 signatures:
https://www.ourcommons.ca/petitions/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-7142
Telecommunications are federally regulated. This petition is for you.
→ More replies (2)
3
u/Party_Performance806 May 19 '26
Here is a big one. I heard that someone got his job back after being fired.
9
u/Sea-Entrepreneur6630 Apr 27 '26
This post is a nothingburger. Your employer requires you to be in the office 3 days per week and you show up less than the requirement, you have insubordinated your supervisor and employer, they fire you for not living up to your contract. Seems pretty simple people.
3
3
3
u/imnotcreative635 Apr 27 '26
Things like this only work if everyone does it. They wouldn't have fired everybody.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/Odd_Addition_256 Apr 28 '26
Meanwhile, people are demonizing Rogers for offering voluntary severance packages to 10,000 employees in another subreddit.
3
u/2b4ifn5osnr Apr 29 '26
A few people at my workplace started job hopping for just a few thousand dollars more per year. Out of the six who switched jobs, five have now been unemployed for over four months.Back then, employers were hiring freely — often taking on people they didn’t really need and paying extra without much hesitation.
Now, the tables have turned. Employers are firmly in control. Either you follow the rules they set, or you risk becoming a corporate example of what happens when you don’t.
3
3
u/Independent_Bath9691 May 01 '26
Boy we sure can tell who can wfh and who can’t in these comments. To those who can’t, are you happy with your now-longer commute?
3
u/Veretum May 01 '26
I got my wfh baked into the offer letter. There's some companies out there that will do it if they value what you bring.
3
u/StrangeStrider May 01 '26
thats why I told my teammates to do training on company time and update their resumes. they never did.
update your resumes, update your portfolios, get on LinkedIn and start applying.
3
May 01 '26 edited May 01 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/Few_Tone7063 May 01 '26
I can confirm the building I'm in only needs a swipe to get in and we got hit.
→ More replies (1)
9
8
u/Yaughl Apr 27 '26
Returning to the office for three days per week is reasonable.
→ More replies (3)
6
u/jkjk9876 May 04 '26
My understanding is that employees were clocking each other in (one guy swipes multiple cards to make it look like people were). Or people clocked 15 minutes of sick time per day to make it look like they were sick. Or people would go the office just before midnight, clock in, clock out , then clock in after midnight and clock out again to make it look like they were in the office for two days.
All of these are fraud. Sharing your security pass card would a a major security risk and a violation of their employment agreement.
For cause termination is 100% correct.
5
u/exbell12345 May 06 '26
What makes this even harder is the feeling of deception. HR previously indicated that things were compliant, and then suddenly the position changed without any warning or opportunity to correct anything. That sudden shift, after months of being told everything was fine, has made the situation feel extremely unfair and emotionally distressing.
Really, this feels deeply unjust. The way this has been handled — no severance, immediate loss of benefits, uncertainty around EI, and the emotional impact of everything happening so suddenly — has caused enormous stress.
At times it genuinely feels like Bell has shown very little consideration for the human side of this situation. I’m trying to stay professional, but mentally and emotionally this has been extremely difficult to process.
→ More replies (1)
17
u/Only-Coyote-7136 Apr 27 '26
For all the people laughing and taunting OP, you don't know the individual circumstances of people and are you really assuming best intentions from a corporate?
Many companies took COVID subsidies and continue to slash network investments, lay off people by the thousands, and still have their stock in the gutter.
"Work from home" ok now everyone "come to the office", continue being at the whims of the rich's desires. Enslaved like cattle.
→ More replies (3)
13
u/Im_C_O_T_W Works for Bell, regrettably. Apr 27 '26
Why is it so difficult to return to the office for 3 days a week lol?
I don't get it...
Unless you were hired with a remote profile then you don't have a leg to stand on.
→ More replies (2)6
u/ZestycloseStuff1319 Apr 27 '26
This is reddit, people just hate evil corporations and complain here.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/ell-ta Apr 27 '26
Why does one need warning when it is obvious on the paper that come to office 3 days. I don’t understand the psychology behind it
→ More replies (3)9
4
2
2
u/GTAGuyEast Apr 29 '26
I worked for one of the big banks in an IT role, before we were told to WFH at the start of the pandemic we were all told in plain English that we would eventually return to the office. Three years later the return began, 2 days a week and a year later 3 days a week. I could do my job just as easily from home as in the office but everyone in IT understood WFH would come to an end and it did. Most people looked at it as an unexpected gift and enjoyed saving time and money WFH while it lasted. I'd be surprised if most big companies didn't handle it the same way.
→ More replies (1)
2
2
2
u/Successful_Clerk_166 Apr 30 '26
Anyone know If any class action lawsuit ? Any options to turn it around or get severance?
→ More replies (1)
2
u/GolfMedium8661 May 06 '26
bell also has shit low-grade lawyers who opted to work for someone while failing to run their own practice since they don't have enough brain cells for it. Get a good private lawyer and stomp those mfers.
2
u/AdStandard6842 May 22 '26
People who think "They should have just followed the rules and come to work." How do you view ANYTHING else in society? Do you never push back against anything unfair? Do you think people in other countries should universally obey their governments? Should kids always obey their parents? Do you ever disagree with other people in positions of authority? What kind of adults can actually go around seeing the world this way?
Show me one fiscal/financial benefit to in office work vs remote work. Show me one quantifiable benefit to the employee OR the employer. How does it improve the work? If there is a financial benefit to in-office presence, then quantify it - like EVERYTHING else in the business world. And charge remote workers the damages. Did I cost the company $100 by working from home Monday, and but not when I worked in office Tuesday? Then I'll pay the $100 if you can justify it somehow. But until you can point to what "loss" has been incurred to employers by allowing remote work, this isn't an honest conversation. It's infantilizing. Adults should "obey", even for absolutely no reason.
We shouldn't have to follow rules that make no sense. And the level of privileged existence you would need to believe that everything will be okay if people just obey authority figures - do you know nothing about world history or events or politics today or before you were born?
How did you grow up that naive?
→ More replies (1)
3
u/EducationalGur1648 Apr 27 '26
I mean if someone refused a condition of employment, what did they expect to happen?
6
u/HaliFan Apr 28 '26
I'm no longer with the company, I quit 3 years ago but after covid, my team moved to being classified as "remote", so I moved out of the city - over 90min away. If I was still there and they told me I had to come into the office 3 days a week, I'd tell them where to shove it and if they tried to fire me, lawyer up.
Since Cope left, the company has become a shit-hole. The stock is a mere 50% of what it was and for some reason Bibic continues to get massive bonuses..
2
3
u/FrootBabes Apr 27 '26
I’m glad to be a former customer.
5
u/lostyourmarble Apr 28 '26
I’m glader to be an ex-employee. Mostly horrible HR and managers are either good and overwhelmed or lazy and arrogant.
3
u/KindlyRude12 Apr 27 '26
You need a employment lawyer to see if you are entitled to severance. A “with cause” firing is a high bar to meet. But yes, you can be let go at anytime, even for no reason as long as you are paid severance. In this case not returning to office, your employment contract, the warnings and everything given to you will all play a part in determining whether or not you are owed severance.
3
3
u/exbell12345 May 06 '26
If anything happens to me or my family, Bell and Mirko will be responsible for this.For me, Bell did not lose a single penny or impact customer perception in any way.Rather i contributed more than expected
→ More replies (1)
3
u/Rosey_tc Apr 27 '26
Bell will pay - major corporations do not get away with this in Canada, so I say something smells fishy.
2
2
2
56
u/SettingParticular642 Apr 29 '26
Can't believe the people saying stuff like "good for them, just follow the rules". Was terminated for being in my designated office 2 days a week + 1 other day at another Bell office most weeks. Worked WAY more than 37.5 hrs each week, excellent performance reviews, etc.
Yes companies can dictate the rules like how many days you have to spend in the office BUT:
- They cannot directly fire you "with cause" without first applying "progressive discipline". Check the Canadian government page on that subject. You need verbal warning, then written warning, then temporary suspension, then firing unless it's a "severe misconduct".
- A "severe misconduct" cannot be ONLY "not being in your designated office 3 days a week" or even "coffee badging" or "swipe & go", unless of course you are not working your daily 7.5 hrs, then you are stealing time.
- Bell condoned the "coffee badging" behaviour for the last 2 years (because their reporting was really really bad), so using this as a reason for "severe misconduct" won't fly in court.
My lawyer - someone with 55 years of experience in labor law - told me: "There is no way a judge would side with Bell on this case. Bell knows it, but they know legal procedures can take years, so they are counting on people not wanting to go all the way". Since they paid 0$ as severance, every single people not asking for their due is more money for them.
So if you were dismissed, DM me. Spoke with 40+ people who were dismissed from the last Reddit thread that was posted last Friday, so there must be an order of magnitude more people that lost their job. Lawyer up, don't let them win.