\n<\/p>\n
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has <\/a> against Grindr. According to Bloomberg<\/em><\/a>, the agency alleges that a return-to-office (RTO) mandate that limited remote work and effectively meant a relocation requirement for many workers was an attempt to fend off a unionization drive. Around 80 of Grindr’s 178 employees quit as a result of last year’s RTO demand, according to the Communications Workers of America (CWA).<\/p>\n The NLRB’s general counsel office has accused Grindr of violating labor law by retaliating against workers who were attempting to organize. Per Bloomberg,<\/em> the agency additionally claims the company refused to recognize the union or to negotiate with it in good faith, which would also be a violation of labor law.<\/p>\n A Grindr spokesperson told the publication that the claims were “meritless.” They added that some employees started signing union cards “only after it was known that the transition back to in-office work was underway.”<\/p>\n According to the CWA, the company announced on August 4 last year that workers would have to attend its offices at least two days a week. A supermajority of workers <\/a> their unionization in July. The union claims that, by the end of August, around half of the staff had been forced to resign. This, in part, was said to a result of relocation requirements.<\/p>\n Among other issues, having to relocate would have required some of Grindr’s trans employees to find alternate healthcare providers, the union has said. “The RTO mandate gave workers two weeks to choose between ending their tenure at Grindr or relocating to their respective team\u2019s newly assigned ‘hub’ city to work in-person twice a week,” the CWA <\/a> when it filed an Unfair Labor Practice against Grindr in September 2023. As <\/em><\/a> noted, many of the workers who had been hired remotely were suddenly required to report to a Grindr office in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco or Washington DC.<\/p>\n This is hardly the first time Grindr has been in hot water lately. Earlier this year, the company <\/a> for allegedly sharing personal information \u2014 including HIV statuses and test dates, ethnicity and sexual orientation \u2014 with advertising companies without users’ consent.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n