Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Company got acquired, new contract seems oppressive

news.ycombinator.com

41–50 of 291 posts

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

#41
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This paperwork is standard. I strongly disagree. It's not unusual for a new employer to try to pull a fast one here, but IME the actual standard among reasonable employers and employees involves wording like "in the course of your employment" or the local equivalent. In short, what you do on company time, with company resources, or in connection with your work at the company is theirs, but anything else is yours by d…

Well, I guess I strongly disagree that it's 'not unusual' for employers to try to 'pull a fast one'. This sort of agreement is standard precisely because it gives both parties a way to protect themselves and delineate what belongs to whom. Bad things happen when you don't have such an agreement. Perhaps things are different in the UK, but I'll echo what 'borksi said downthread - just about every software job in the U…

This sort of agreement is standard precisely because it gives both parties a way to protect themselves and delineate what belongs to whom.

But it doesn't. What it does is make the employer win by default, even for things that have nothing to do with the job. Given the dramatic power imbalance that almost certainly exists between employer and employee anyway, this is the wrong way around. In fact, it's such a bad idea that there is now statute law on the books in various jurisdictions -- including, as I understand it, some states in the USA -- explicitly to nullify such terms in employment contracts.

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

#42

Find an employment attorney. Pay that person for an hour or two to read the contract for you. They will be able to offer much better advice than HN.

Had a friend mention he was going to do this on a job interview and the company he was talking to almost immediately cut him a settlement check to keep him from doing it and to just make him go away. Don't ever assume something a company is doing is on the up-and-up.

Can you elaborate? He was interviewed as in, came in off the street, so to speak, to interview, made mention of having a lawyer review contract language and was cut a check?

Or was this an interview with the acquiring company?

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

#43

Find an employment attorney. Pay that person for an hour or two to read the contract for you. They will be able to offer much better advice than HN.

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

If you're a member of a professional association or union, they might be able to provide you employment-contract advice. In Denmark in the engineering field for example, most workers are members of the engineers' union 'Ingeniørforeningen', which will provide you employment-related legal advice [1].

[1] http://english.ida.dk/why-join/core-benefits/counselling

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

#44

Find an employment attorney. Pay that person for an hour or two to read the contract for you. They will be able to offer much better advice than HN.

Had a friend mention he was going to do this on a job interview and the company he was talking to almost immediately cut him a settlement check to keep him from doing it and to just make him go away. Don't ever assume something a company is doing is on the up-and-up.

Why would they do that in a job interview? Why not just not extend an offer? That seems very strange.

You should mention what company it was, I would love to go to a few interviews and then walk away with a settlement check for no reason.

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

#45
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This paperwork is standard. I strongly disagree. It's not unusual for a new employer to try to pull a fast one here, but IME the actual standard among reasonable employers and employees involves wording like "in the course of your employment" or the local equivalent. In short, what you do on company time, with company resources, or in connection with your work at the company is theirs, but anything else is yours by d…

Well, I guess I strongly disagree that it's 'not unusual' for employers to try to 'pull a fast one'. This sort of agreement is standard precisely because it gives both parties a way to protect themselves and delineate what belongs to whom. Bad things happen when you don't have such an agreement. Perhaps things are different in the UK, but I'll echo what 'borksi said downthread - just about every software job in the U…

Silhouette's point is that the good employers use language that qualifies the inventions to which they are entitled: on company time or equipment and relevant to the company's business, etc..

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

#46
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I guess I strongly disagree that it's 'not unusual' for employers to try to 'pull a fast one'. This sort of agreement is standard precisely because it gives both parties a way to protect themselves and delineate what belongs to whom. Bad things happen when you don't have such an agreement. Perhaps things are different in the UK, but I'll echo what 'borksi said downthread - just about every software job in the U…

This sort of agreement is standard precisely because it gives both parties a way to protect themselves and delineate what belongs to whom. But it doesn't. What it does is make the employer win by default, even for things that have nothing to do with the job. Given the dramatic power imbalance that almost certainly exists between employer and employee anyway, this is the wrong way around. In fact, it's such a bad idea…

This is such a bad idea [...]

I'm afraid this matches neither my experience and, I'm willing to bet, the experience of just about everyone who's worked in the field in the US in the last couple of decades. Again, I know nothing about how things work in the UK. In the US, this stuff is a formality akin to all the other formalities of an employment contract, say, your tax, 401k and health insurance forms.

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

#47

Find an employment attorney. Pay that person for an hour or two to read the contract for you. They will be able to offer much better advice than HN.

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

Ask friends or acquaintances that you trust.

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

#48
post #35
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know that labor unions are much more widespread in Europe than they are in the US these days, but that's all I really know about the European situation. Still, are things THAT much different in Europe? Honest question. I just can't imagine that they'd give free legal advice to nonmembers, or that there would be a lot of expertise in this specific area of employment law. Or is that not true? Maybe I've been biased b…

You're being biased by the climate in the US. A lot of union rep would give free legal advice to nonmembers, especially for small and common things such as clauses in employment contracts.

Would a union rep have a lot of experience with intellectual property agreements and their legal consequences?

I would have guessed that most union reps consult lawyers when they finalize a contract and don't have the law background needed.

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

#49
post #45
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I guess I strongly disagree that it's 'not unusual' for employers to try to 'pull a fast one'. This sort of agreement is standard precisely because it gives both parties a way to protect themselves and delineate what belongs to whom. Bad things happen when you don't have such an agreement. Perhaps things are different in the UK, but I'll echo what 'borksi said downthread - just about every software job in the U…

Silhouette's point is that the good employers use language that qualifies the inventions to which they are entitled: on company time or equipment and relevant to the company's business, etc..

Or, instead of that, they hand you a piece of paper where you get to list your inventions. Which is much simpler, less prone to misinterpretation and perhaps a reason why everyone does it that way.

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

#50
post #49
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Silhouette's point is that the good employers use language that qualifies the inventions to which they are entitled: on company time or equipment and relevant to the company's business, etc..

Or, instead of that, they hand you a piece of paper where you get to list your inventions. Which is much simpler, less prone to misinterpretation and perhaps a reason why everyone does it that way.

Hehe, my point was that both qualifying language and an explicit list are not mutually incompatible; in fact we have both in my current assignment of inventions agreement.
Post reply on HN