Hi everyone!
Looking for some perspective on a situation regarding travel expectations being randomly added to my fully remote role because it’s causing me a ton of stress.
Background:
* I was hired (through acquisition) two years ago as a fully remote employee in New York City; promoted to current role one year ago
* My offer letter and promotion letter issued by the acquiring company contain zero mention of travel requirements; I also signed their covenant employment agreement with non-compete
* My employer is headquartered in Georgia
* I’m a mid-level employee, used to report to the VP, now report to a middle manager they hired over me as this person has more experience
* The VP is not an understanding leader, is quick to fire people, and engages in constructive dismissal amongst other non-ethical or legal practices, but is fully protected by the company. Challenging to work with.
What just happened:
My VP recently issued a written travel policy stating that travel may be required at the discretion of the company. The expected travel - which would be nearly all air travel - includes:
* 2 mandatory week-long trips to company HQ per year
* 2 additional week-long trips that are “strongly suggested”
* 1 on-site client visit per year per client (I have ~15 clients, the closest is a 6 hour drive, the rest are flying distance)
* Additional ad hoc travel to clients for escalations as needed
By my calculation this is approx. 25% of my working year in travel. For a role that was hired as fully remote with nothing about travel in any employment document.
What I’ve done so far:
I requested a written policy after the VP tried to casually dump this on me and my brand new manager over Teams. My VP provided one (and CC’ed HR) and offered to meet with me and HR to discuss possible options if I have “challenges” meeting these expectations.
My questions:
* Can an employer legally add significant travel requirements to a fully remote role two years in with no travel language in the original offer letter?
* Does the offer to meet with HR about possible options have any legal significance?
* As a New York City employee with a Georgia-based employer which state’s laws apply to me? The covenant implies Georgia.
* Is this worth consulting an employment attorney about?
Thanks in advance if you take the time to read through this!!!!