American here. I have a job where they have a perk where you submit receipts through their app or website and you earn points you can cash out at some point if you shop with clients of our company. Sounds like a nice little promotional incentive, right?

Well, they say it’s optional but it’s not. You can apparently get in trouble for not using this and we’ve been pulled aside about it and warned we must use this stupid thing.

The idea is the app you install must be given permission to see your location at all times. It then checks the area to ensure you are favoring clients of our company as opposed to our competitors when you shop. When you shop at one of our clients, you must report your receipt to the company showing everything you bought while there. Even if you are buying gas, you need to report it.

I don’t participate in this invasion of privacy. I actually want to put less of my data out there in general, not more. I don’t even have a grocery store discount card. We were told in a meeting this week that promotions in this company are influenced by how much/if you participate in the program. We were told people have been denied promotions because they did not participate in this program.

If I’m off the clock they don’t get to decide what I do. They can fuck themselves. And I am surely not giving them a little report of what I buy. But saying we are ineligible for career advancement within the company unless we buy groceries, gas, etc from preferred vendors seems sketchy. Is this legal?

  • davel [he/him]@lemmy.mlEnglish
    97·
    13 hours ago

    This sounds like a company store with extra steps. IANAL but it sounds extremely illegal for your employer to dictate what you do with your wages in any way, including linking it to career advancement. I highly doubt this is a union job, so your best bet might be to talk to a labor attorney. Do not talk to the company’s HR dept., because they don’t work for you; they work for your employer.

    • RustyShackleford@literature.cafeEnglish
      10·
      11 hours ago

      Agreed, the company is just waiting out a class action lawsuit where they will only end up paying 20% of what they’ve made as legal punishment; a scam old as time. I would wonder if they’ve put this in writing or could be recorded demanding the employees do these behaviors.

      • muusemuuse@lemm.eeOPEnglish
        1·
        5 hours ago

        the last meeting was recorded but we can’t access the recordings. I might be able to snag a recording myself but then it becomes really cagey as to whether such evidence can but used so its a risk with no benefit.

      • hoshikarakitaridia@lemmy.world
        3·
        9 hours ago

        THIS

        Try to get this in writing, or document your day-to-day with this. Focus on the retaliation, the instances they tell you how you’re supposed to spend your money and maybe get coworkers to back you up and write that down.

        The more clear evidence, the better. Lawyers love when you have a bunch of evidence in writing. Especially if it’s emails or similar directly from them that prove your case.

    • hallettj@leminal.spaceEnglish
      12·
      11 hours ago

      I’m not a lawyer either. But going off the company store insight, maybe we can look to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. It prohibits paying wages in scrip, or “similar devices”. Scrip can take a couple of forms; one is an internal company currency that can only be spent at the company store. That provision in the FLSA was specifically intended to shut down company store scams.

      It seems that an implied condition of your work is spending some portion of your wages at certain stores. Since scrip is money that can only be spent in certain places, it might be argued that if you are required to spend a portion of your wages in certain places, that has the same effect as paying a portion of your wages in scrip.

      Unfortunately after a bit of searching I haven’t seen this specific argument made. But again, I’m not a lawyer, and I don’t know how to research case law. It sounds like they’re trying to claim this program in optional, so it might be challenging to prove that participation is de facto mandatory. I’m guessing if you could get someone to tell you a number for how much they expect you to spend in this program that would help with such an argument. On second thought, I don’t actually know how helpful a number would be, and I don’t want to get you in trouble.