Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Contracts you should never sign

vadimkravcenko.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 284 posts

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#271

Post by listenallyall »

toss1 wrote: post #259
johndhi wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? Every click wrap agreement online is very one sided. You think you're saving yourself trouble by not using any online software?

I'm obviously not talking about click wrap agreements; I'm talking about in-person negotiations. The click-wrap "agreements" are all bullsh*t "adhesion contracts", and in that context are virtually unenforceable. That said, yes, I will strongly prefer to work with software that doesn't have such nonsense when possible. E.g., I've used LibreOffice for decades to avoid M$ office (which I can also watch family & friends…

Microsoft with the dollar sign, M$. How clever! Bet you had a ton of karma on Slashdot

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#272

Post by listenallyall »

thwayunion wrote: post #146
claytonjy wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have successfully negotiated my way out of non-competes and other onerous employment contract terms. Only at small- or medium-sized startups, though, not big tech. In general the bigger the company, the less willing legal is to play ball. I suspect going for rather senior roles helps, too.

Non-competes are dog-eat-dog "fuck you" territory for me. I don't even bother negotiating. I happily sign non-competes, but will never sign a non-compete that's actually enforceable . If their lawyers want to lie to me about what's legal in my state, I'm happy to let them engage in unfair and deceptive behavior right up until there are actual damages. More importantly, I would also happily fight them in court if it c…

Are you a lawyer? Or do you have a lawyer review every contract you sign? Just curious how you are so confident a particular contract, or clause within, is unenforceable. Not saying you're wrong, but how do you know?

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#273

Post by listenallyall »

secondstring wrote: post #40
ModernMech wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But in reality if you stick to these rules hard and fast, you'll basically never accept a job offer. That's clearly an exaggeration, but many-to-most of these clauses are in every boilerplate contract. In the tech industry, yeah, but there are industries that aren't so employee hostile where you can find better contract terms. I'd have to say in my experience, the tech industry is one of the worst when it comes to…

Totally correct - I tried to caveat that in my post by saying I'm skewed hard tech industry. That was the main attention of the article, and my main experience, so I was writing from that viewpoint. I somehow doubt that Vail Resorts has a non-compete for their lift operators to go work on another mountain (although now that I think about it VR is pretty terrible so this might have been a bad example)

Maybe not Vail Resorts, but it is indeed happening...

The noncompete agreement prohibited Mr. Meier from hiring any of Intermountain’s employees, from janitorial staff to ski lift operators

https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2022/attorney-general-james-...

Also, fast-food employees: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28702468

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#274

Post by listenallyall »

codingdave wrote: post #25
cloogshicer wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the important thing is that you asked. I've had a very negative experience, where I also asked, and they basically said "sign it or GTFO". So I did the latter, and I'm very glad I did.

A number of years back, our company was acquired and they sent us employment contracts from our new owners, with that same "sign it or GTFO" message. Many people signed. A few of us just didn't. Nastygrams kept on coming, we kept on ignoring them. Ultimately, we never did end up signing. Which is the other piece of the puzzle - lawyers are really good at knowing when they actually have power and when they do not. Unf…

I think you might be a bit presumptuous. Why do you believe they don't have legal power? If you are an at-will employee, you can typically be fired for any reason. Not signing the updated employment agreement is, unfortunately, a valid reason.

In your case, they did not exercise that right. But I've been at places where they did. For something as petty as not signing an agreement which appeared to eliminate some employee benefits that were contractually obligated. Could the fired employees have sued, and won? Perhaps. But it would be an expensive, risky, time-consuming proposition to find out.

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#275

Post by eschneider »

jrockway wrote: post #198
eschneider wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah...when I left a job in 2021, HR presented me with a bunch of new agreements that they wanted me to sign. I explained to them that it just didn't work that way.

With enough compensation it could work. I'd sign "we'll give you $5M to not work for 1 year." Stream casual games on Twitch for a year :)

Sure. But they were just "Hey, sign these new agreements before you leave." Yeah...no.

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#276

Post by dragonwriter »

smeej wrote: post #21

Also verify that anything you're signing when you leave matches what you signed when you were hired. I recently left a company where, when I was hired, I had agreed in "Appendix C" not to recruit any of their employees away from them for a period of 12 months after separation. When I actually separated after more than two years, the "Appendix C" they wanted me to sign and presented as the one I had agreed to at hire…

> Also verify that anything you're signing when you leave matches what you signed when you were hired.b

Better, just don't sign anything when leaving without sufficient new consideration. If they really want to five you a reminder of what you signed when you joined, that’s what copiers are for.

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#277

Post by pm24601 »

... or move to the State of California which has laws that make such contracts illegal. I remember one contract I signed which had an addendum that read:

"section blah blah does not apply to residents of the State of California."

So 49 other state residents are getting a bad deal but California residents are getting a better deal, yet the company is doing just fine. Hmmm Maybe that section isn't needed anywhere?

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#278

Post by pm24601 »

TylerE wrote: post #226
sidewndr46 wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you even function in the US? Just one time to get an apartment they had me sign an agreement stating I was not in the military, had never been in the military & would not join so long as I lived there. Keep in mind, I was subject to conscription at the time. The whole thing is laughably unenforceable as well. They're trying to end run around federal law protecting members of the uniformed services. You can…

That’s a good example, but most contracts have language such as “if any clause of this contract is found to be invalid, the rest remains in force”. So yea, in a case like that that part of the contract would be struck, but it isn’t a get out of jail free card for the entire contract.

My experience with companies pulling DIY contract addendums out of their ass is that they forget severability clauses. Or that the contract starts falling apart because they have other sections which refer to the severed part which means those sections also fall apart. For example, a damages section that ends up exceeding state law.

DIY contracts are the best to sign because they are such a mess.

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#279

Post by sumtechguy »

harvey9 wrote: post #264
sumtechguy wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The funny NDA's are the ones where they think they have a 'secret sauce'. Then you get in there and find out they are using some off the shelf API's exactly as intended. You start asking exact questions and they do not understand how you know so much about their product already.

How is it that someone smart enough to be able to read the docs and connect up to the API can still be unable to realise that they are using something that others can also use?

I just think it is sort of funny. But connecting API's up is what many do. Reading the docs is something a lot of people skip, not hard just tedious. The NDA part is a funny twist where I can see an NDA around their business case and who they are working with. But the tech is rarely anything groundbreaking. Had one guy who only wanted to work with 'mozarts' no 'salieris'. That was some weapons grade hubris there. It was basically a in memory hash table he was building. Thought he had some sort of serious secret sauce with that 'idea'. When his real secret sauce was his client list and connections.

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#280

Post by toss1 »

listenallyall wrote: post #271
toss1 wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm obviously not talking about click wrap agreements; I'm talking about in-person negotiations. The click-wrap "agreements" are all bullsh*t "adhesion contracts", and in that context are virtually unenforceable. That said, yes, I will strongly prefer to work with software that doesn't have such nonsense when possible. E.g., I've used LibreOffice for decades to avoid M$ office (which I can also watch family & friends…

Microsoft with the dollar sign, M$. How clever! Bet you had a ton of karma on Slashdot

That's a name I haven't heard in a very long time....

(as in I haven't been on or even thought about Slashdot for well over a decade. But, apparently, in your limited world, someone cannot use a common vernacular to maybe help make a point without being accused of karma-whoring, which is clearly what is on top of your mind. You really think your comment adds value to the discussion; if so, how?)

Post reply on HN