Originally Posted by
HerrKaLeun
I don't think the comparison to Uber and Pizza delivery are applicable here. For those professions delivery/driving is the only part the job is. For an architect the job is designing etc. A car, a chair, a computer etc. are just tools to accomplish that. Unless the salary is huge (and car driving expense is negligible) or there is mileage reimbursement, this sounds like a scammy job. Maybe this ia a depressed area and the market for architects is bad, so he may be forced to do that. But that doesn't make it right nor fair. and he may only have meetings once a week, so buying a car just for that is expensive compared to someone who has a car anyway.
Not sure about cyprus, but here in the US there is not much money in architecture unless you are licensed. If this is an entry job, it is likely not making much more money than delivering pizza...
There is no law that says "Pizza Hut can require you to have a car but office jobs can't"
If the employer says "Transportation is required" then it's required. They can set any job requirements they want as long as the requirement doesn't discriminate against applicants due to age, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or race. They can discriminate against applicants for just about anything else, including "Not having a car"
I'm a good example of this. I bike to work 3 days a week on average. I'd bike all 5 but I routinely have to go out during the day for job related stuff where I need a car. Usually it's a short trip near the office, but I can't take an hour to go 10 miles. And I can't be sweaty when I get there. And I often have to take materials with me that I can't carry on a bike. A car is required for the job. The job does not provide me with one if I don't have one. If I wanted to bike 5 days a week no matter what, this wouldn't be the right job for me.