That compensation is better isn't in dispute. My question is about worker rights, how much of the stuff you posted is just your company vs US law? Are you protected better by law than someone here would be?
What is more important, the law, or the typical employee experience? If you're in a strong market where workers are in demand (evidenced somewhat by higher compensation), then workers will tend to be treated better for fear that they will leave for another opportunity (remember: "at will"). If workers have fewer opportunities, then how much can the law really help?
Are there specific protections that are lacking in the US that you would expect to result in worse employee outcomes?
I'm not sure what any of that has to do with my question. The person I replied to said that from what he knew worker rights were somewhat better in the US so I asked for examples. How an employer treats you is of course important, but can't really be considered worker rights if they can decide to change that depending on market conditions.
Again, I'm not arguing about who has it better. I am asking a very narrow question about worker rights differences between the two countries. If you want me to say that US software workers have it better, then sure. But that's not really what I'm asking.
