I know there's a lot of people on here that usually have some good advice so got a question for you all.
To cut a long story short the company is trying to move people onto a fixed overtime contract (previously there was no overtime clause which is illegal). To get people to sign they've basically taken away employees flex time by stating that it's a legal requirement to have minashi zangyo in your contract otherwise it's impossible to work flex hours.
The flex time wasn't previously stated in the contract (nor did we have a company rule book or an LMA – this is currently being setup with a lot of pushback).
Is the company correct in their statement that flex time legally hinges on signing the minashi zangyo clause or is this posturing on their side?
Furthermore, what is the legal standing of holding flex time (that the entire company enjoys all over the world) behind a much worse clause in the contract as a way to strong arm us?
There's been push back on the proposed LMA with the flex time only being available to employees that signed the overtime contract. Is it correct that flex time should be available to all employees as it was previously, or is the company in the right here?
I've used AI quite a bit to research this but understandbly I'm reluctant to place all my faith in a robot.
Throwaway account obviously but thanks in advance.
by Intelligent-Sky-1973