Political Discussion

Apple is cracking down on remote work through aggressive employee tracking.

For a year now it's been Apple's mandate that all employees must be in the office a minimum of 4 days a week. They want you in the office and not working remotely. Many of their top engineers have left because they want the ability to continue working remotely. And many people were only working 3 days in the office or not a full 8 hours each day and finishing up their work at home.

Apple is tracking how long people are in the office each day and how many days a week through ID badge scans for access to their facilities. Each employee must have a minimum of 8 hours a day in the building (this does not include time they leave for lunch) and at least 4 days a week. Any employee who is not complying / meeting minimum requirements are now being disciplined or let go.

Apple has also just updated their sick time policy, ditching the special sick time policy they adapted during the pandemic. They are back to if you are sick, and can't come into the office you shouldn't be working at all. You can't work from home when you are sick. So basically, this has resulted with people coming into the office and spreading covid or the flu because they can't work from home and don't have the sick time or want to save their sick time for a rainy day.

And if you do take a sick day and stay at home, that counts as the one day of the week whereas of this time, you can still work from home. However, Apple is expected to go back to a 5 day work week sometime this year.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
What is there reasoning behind this? Is it that they are afraid of a "male" being in the girls bathroom being a "perve" or that by allowing this we are indoctoring our kids?
Click to expand...

Being the “other” in any context is tough. Each situation is fraught with what ifs. Despite what restroom they use they risk bullying. But going into a misgendered bathroom essentially outs them. Going to the nurse is probably the safest option.

However then there is the problem of changing for PE. There is a lot of kids that special compensation for this because of disabilities. We may start seeing this for Trans kids as well.

FYI, the school that I work at has a LGTBQ club. It’s actually called something entirely different to not out the kids to the parents. This is CA though and a major city.
 
There was a paper published in the journal Science last week that is getting a lot of press coverage this week.

Basically, the journal says colorectal cancer rates are sharply increasing in younger people and we don't know why. People in their 20's and 30's. And age not really known for cancer or this particular type of cancer historically, which comes with older age.

While the journal doesn't talk about it, some of the media outlets have been. And that's the fact that that colorectal cancer is much more deadly in young adults because it often is't detected early.

Not just because people think "I'm too young, it can't be cancer" and doctors not checking for it due to age, but because of the insurance companies. They won't pay for / cover colonoscopies just because a GI doctor has concerns and wants to run test. Literally everything else needs to be ruled out first because the patient is statistically "too young" to have colorectal cancer or they are below the government's recommended age to start screenings.

And that right there makes it political and only further proof we need healthcare reform. If you doctor thinks a test should be run, it should be run and covered. Not, oh well, let's rule out this and that first because we don't want to pay for this because we think it's medically unnecessary for this age group.
 
Speaking of colonoscopies I was speaking to a coworker this afternoon had issues with his insurance cover it a couple years back when discussion the above and learned more about his situation.

Basically, he needed to get prior authorization from his insurance company to get the colonoscopie. He and his doctor thought they had it and was told as much by the person they spoke to at the insurance company. But I guess due to paperwork issues / errors at the insurance company it was never documented / communicated correctly internally, therefor the insurance claim was denied for not having prior authorization.

When he appealed the insurance companies decision and showed his proof that he had prior authorization and that there was an issue, his appeal was denied again stating, there was no prior authorization. Even with help from HR he got nothing but the run around. It was incredibly frustrating, and soon became clear he would get nowhere without hiring a lawyer. He ended up just cutting a deal with the hospitals collections department to settle at a half of the total cost and worked out a repayment plan just to be done with it.

Why does it have to be so difficult to get medical expenses paid. And why are issues on the insurance companies side like this mean they can get out of paying the bill without a care to the world rather than make things right.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
There was a paper published in the journal Science last week that is getting a lot of press coverage this week.

Basically, the journal says colorectal cancer rates are sharply increasing in younger people and we don't know why. People in their 20's and 30's. And age not really known for cancer or this particular type of cancer historically, which comes with older age.

While the journal doesn't talk about it, some of the media outlets have been. And that's the fact that that colorectal cancer is much more deadly in young adults because it often is't detected early.

Not just because people think "I'm too young, it can't be cancer" and doctors not checking for it due to age, but because of the insurance companies. They won't pay for / cover colonoscopies just because a GI doctor has concerns and wants to run test. Literally everything else needs to be ruled out first because the patient is statistically "too young" to have colorectal cancer or they are below the government's recommended age to start screenings.

And that right there makes it political and only further proof we need healthcare reform. If you doctor thinks a test should be run, it should be run and covered. Not, oh well, let's rule out this and that first because we don't want to pay for this because we think it's medically unnecessary for this age group.
Click to expand...
Meh, having worked in healthcare for a bit, I'm not necessarily on board with doctor's being able to run tests carte blanche either. Sometimes they run shit to make money. Part of healthcare reform really needs to be focused on making it infrastructure and not for profit.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
Nah, you would be lucky to even get that in cases like this. All the courts really ever hand out is 3 or 5 years of "free credit monitoring" after data breaches.

Unless HIPPA was violated with the breach, then there is some good money to be made.
Click to expand...
With a HIPAA violation you are looking at at least $50. With that money, you can leave a fat tip.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top