Companies have been known to increase workloads or subject employees to difficult assessments in an effort to weed out underperformers or reduce workforce. A Chinese company, on the other hand, went so far as to relocate to a difficult terrain in order to put pressure on its employees to leave.
The aforementioned Chinese firm is facing backlash from its workforce, with nearly 70% of employees resigning following the company’s relocation from a bustling city to a remote mountain area. Workers claim the move was intended to evade severance pay. These accusations may not have been entirely unfounded, as the company quickly returned to the city and even began recruiting new employees.
The firm allegedly orchestrated a relocation to a remote mountainous area, prompting employees to resign, saving money on severance/compensation. A former employee, identified as Chang, revealed the actions of the Xian-based advertising firm in Shaanxi province, Central China.
According to Chang, the advertising company relocated to a remote location in the Qinling Mountains. The new location required a two-hour commute each way, totaling a four-hour daily travel time for employees. Furthermore, the remote location lacked reliable transportation and connectivity.
In addition to the poor working conditions, Chang mentioned a lack of proper amenities, which forced female employees to use public restrooms in the nearby village. Safety concerns arose during the dark commute home, with stray dogs posing a threat. As a result, over 20 employees staged unsuccessful protests, and 14 eventually resigned.
Surprisingly, four days after their departure, the company returned to the city centre and started actively recruiting new employees. Former employees began to suspect that the difficult working conditions were imposed on purpose to force them to quit. The company of course refutes these allegations and claims the move was a temporary cost-cutting measure; that it couldn’t afford the high rent in the Central Business District and that renovations were going on at the new office. The company insists that it was a temporary measure and that it would consider taking legal action against the employees who attempted to harm its image and reputation, resulting in a loss of business.
