Ask HN: Company got acquired, new contract seems oppressive • Hacker News Board

Re: Ask HN: Company got acquired, new contract seems oppressive

#141

Post by fatman » Wed, Jun 17, 2015, 11:09 AM UTC

fredkbloggs wrote: post #52

egocodedinsol wrote: post #10

Assuming you do get a 'reasonably priced' lawyer in this situation, how confident can you be in the answer? Put another way, if @ExhibitAClause2 were to end up in court how much would the outcome depend on the quality of lawyer arsenal at his disposal versus BigCo? I ask because there are countless scenarios when an attorney clears something and an expensive lawsuit still occurs, e.g. patent trolls.

Successfully suing a large corporation is effectively impossible in the United States, regardless of merit. Your only hope is that the case is so egregious that you get a modest settlement offer just to go away, along with the one-in-a-million chance that some superstar lawyer takes your case pro bono. Practically speaking, you will never make it into a courtroom because you will be broke years before the case reache…

You don't need a lawyer pro-bono, just one on contingency. If you can survive the motion to dismiss at the outset, you've now entered discovery, and BigCo will now start incurring bigtime legal costs. Settlement offers will be forthcoming. Litigation isn't about winning in the courtroom, it's about inflicting pain until someone says "uncle". (Patent litigation often goes further because the stakes are so high. Your five-figure breach of contract suit, not so much.)

Re: Ask HN: Company got acquired, new contract seems oppressive

#142

Post by burgreblast » Wed, Jun 17, 2015, 11:26 AM UTC

Super simple: enumerate your inventions and projects and ideas.

If that's not easy to do there's a good chance they're ideas still germinating in your head. Fine, write those down too. Be general and land-grabby if you like.

I'll bet you can come up with 100 "projects" in about an hour, and that will well protect your legitimate interests/claims.

You can still spend an hour with an attorney telling you a) you don't have to sign it, but b) you might not get the job.

But if you have a sweet list, then you're covered.

Re: Ask HN: Company got acquired, new contract seems oppressive

#143

Post by mnw21cam » Wed, Jun 17, 2015, 11:45 AM UTC

hinkley wrote: post #82

Do not, under any circumstances, go to your bosses looking for advice on this. In many cases the C-level employees of the old company have bonuses tied up in retaining a certain fraction of the original employee team for the term of their incentive package, and they lose out on part of their payout if they don't. Not to say your bosses are going to steer you wrong, but it's very likely that it's now a conflict of int…

That sounds like a really big opportunity to me. Those bosses are going to want to give you some leeway in order to retain you, which gives you some bargaining leverage.

Re: Ask HN: Company got acquired, new contract seems oppressive

#144

Post by grabeh » Wed, Jun 17, 2015, 11:46 AM UTC

solve wrote: post #139

mattmanser wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't call it insane, it's similar to the idea that if you email someone a summary of what was agreed, and they don't reply contesting it, they've accepted that version of events. Basically one of the parties has provided a written record of their version of events, if you don't agree with it, you need to speak up. In the end they've told you the contract they want you to work under, they have provided you with…

Edit: You guys are all wrong. There is no blanket automatic acceptance of contracts if you ignore them in the UK. There IS automatic acceptance of updates to previously signed contracts, ONLY if the original signed contract contains "terms permitting the employer to make changes from time to time" without your permission. That is completely different than automatic acceptance of all contracts that are left unsigned a…

Acceptance by conduct is a straightforward and accepted principle of English law.

In the same way as continued use of a website can constitute acceptance of terms of use, showing up for a job having been provided with a contract, but having not signed it, can also constitute acceptance of that contract.

If you don't like contract terms, firstly don't sign up to them but secondly don't start working at a place as if you had signed up to them.

It would be difficult to argue the contract wasn't binding if you had acted in compliance with certain of its terms. The more specific those terms you are complying with, the less likely you would be able to claim you weren't bound by the whole contract.

For example if the contract states you have to travel to a particular location once a week, and you comply with that obligation, you would be less likely to argue you weren't bound by the whole contract.

Re: Ask HN: Company got acquired, new contract seems oppressive

#145

Post by davidgerard » Wed, Jun 17, 2015, 11:47 AM UTC

learnstats2 wrote: post #84

tptacek wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have actually seen both crossing-and-initialing work, and, more often than that, simply not signing: take the paperwork, say you need to read it, and "forget about it". You can often slowroll things like this for awhile.

Warning: Slowrolling and continuing to work without objection may count as implicit agreement to an employment contract in the UK.

Not if you're actively negotiating the terms at the time.

Re: Ask HN: Company got acquired, new contract seems oppressive

#146

Post by desas » Wed, Jun 17, 2015, 11:56 AM UTC

solve wrote: post #139

mattmanser wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't call it insane, it's similar to the idea that if you email someone a summary of what was agreed, and they don't reply contesting it, they've accepted that version of events. Basically one of the parties has provided a written record of their version of events, if you don't agree with it, you need to speak up. In the end they've told you the contract they want you to work under, they have provided you with…

Edit: You guys are all wrong. There is no blanket automatic acceptance of contracts if you ignore them in the UK. There IS automatic acceptance of updates to previously signed contracts, ONLY if the original signed contract contains "terms permitting the employer to make changes from time to time" without your permission. That is completely different than automatic acceptance of all contracts that are left unsigned a…

From your link:

> However, if you put up with the change without > protesting, there is a good chance that you will > be viewed as having implicitly accepted the change, > losing your right to object to it.

I'd be surprised if the US hasn't inherited implied contracts via common law.

Re: Ask HN: Company got acquired, new contract seems oppressive

#147

Post by solve » Wed, Jun 17, 2015, 12:00 PM UTC

desas wrote: post #146

solve wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edit: You guys are all wrong. There is no blanket automatic acceptance of contracts if you ignore them in the UK. There IS automatic acceptance of updates to previously signed contracts, ONLY if the original signed contract contains "terms permitting the employer to make changes from time to time" without your permission. That is completely different than automatic acceptance of all contracts that are left unsigned a…

From your link: > However, if you put up with the change without > protesting, there is a good chance that you will > be viewed as having implicitly accepted the change, > losing your right to object to it. I'd be surprised if the US hasn't inherited implied contracts via common law.

No, don't quote out of context. That's ONLY if you already previously signed a contract with them, and that original contract specifically allowed them to make future updates without your permission.

Re: Ask HN: Company got acquired, new contract seems oppressive

#148

Post by richardfontana » Wed, Jun 17, 2015, 12:02 PM UTC

smutticus wrote: post #59

ExhibitAClause2 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whats the best way to go about finding one on short notice in a generic major city?

You might just try contacting the biggest union near you and asking. They typically know plenty of labor lawyers. It can't hurt.

If the OP is in the US: in the US, 'labor law' and 'employment law' are two different specialties. Labor law focuses on the laws concerning unions, organized labor, and collective bargaining, while employment law is concerned with laws affecting all aspects of the employer-employee relationship. You'd want an employment law specialist for this sort of issue, or a generalist lawyer with experience in helping software engineers deal with employment law issues.

Re: Ask HN: Company got acquired, new contract seems oppressive

#149

Post by a5seo » Wed, Jun 17, 2015, 12:13 PM UTC

I have simply described pre-existing IP very very broadly and vaguely, and not had a problem. HR and legal are less likely to challenge what you write than changes you make to their contract language.

Re: Ask HN: Company got acquired, new contract seems oppressive

#150

Post by cactusface » Wed, Jun 17, 2015, 12:13 PM UTC

pvg wrote: post #120

jacquesm wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a matter of whether or not the paperwork is standard, the problem is that an acquisition does not normally require existing employees to sign new contracts and 'harmonizing' the relationships the company has with its employees is something they would only do if they feel their own contracts give them a more solid position on something they care about. So this is a non-negotiable reduction in the legal positi…

an acquisition does not normally require existing employees to sign new contracts I'm not sure why you think that is true. So this is a non-negotiable reduction in the legal position of the employees at best. This is an extraordinary statement that requires the requisite evidence. I don't think it matches US law or precedent, it simply seeks to formalize it, while giving the other party a full and fair negotiating po…

Every single time a man has abducted a child he was not in jail. Can you think of a counterexample?