Contracts you should never sign • Hacker News Board

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#281

Post by thwayunion » Mon, Jan 30, 2023, 9:19 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #193

thwayunion wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no honor is dying on an ER stretcher. For anyone in the US who needs regular healthcare beyond what's provided by Medicaid, the labor market is a war for (literal) survival. If the ownership class didn't want to return to an extremely adversarial relationship with labor, then they shouldn't have gutted the social safety net. And no, I'm not going to show my hand in an imperfect information game... it would b…

Honor is what separates men from animals. Each of us gets to choose which we are.

Did you just insinuate I'm subhuman because I don't bend over when a megacorp insists that I sign an unenforceable noncompete?

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#282

Post by weaksauce » Tue, Jan 31, 2023, 12:23 AM UTC

thwayunion wrote: post #128

codingdave wrote: post #13

> the best thing we as engineers can do is be aware of the types of contracts we're signing I'd argue that the best thing we can do is to not just make generalizations about what is OK to sign or not. Confidentiality agreements and non-competes are fine if they are narrowly focused, fair, and your compensation is sufficient to make it worth the restrictions. Because that is what a contract really is - a balancing act…

Serious question: is it even possible to get a well-paying dev position that doesn't have one or more of the clauses listed in the article? Another consideration is whether the contract can be enforced and your legal recourse if the counter-party attempts to enforce an invalid contract clause. This is particularly true for noncompetes. A better piece of advice than "never sign" is to simply find an employment lawyer…

in some states those clauses aren't enforceable like in california.

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#283

Post by CrimsonCape » Tue, Jan 31, 2023, 2:42 AM UTC

harvey9 wrote: post #265

CrimsonCape wrote: post #233

I work in an industry that is very much “at-will.” I signed an “Employee Handbook Acknowledgement” which says “I understand and agree that the handbook is not a contract of employment, or a promise or guarantee of continued employment” The “handbook” contains statements like “company owns all employee creations and IP ,etc etc etc” It’s ambiguous enough to seem to apply to side projects. What is your opinion of this?…

Sounds that way to me too. Do you have an actual written contract of employment which the handbook attemps to tack clauses onto?

No. The only document I have signed is the aforementioned "Handbook Acknowledgement."

My concern is that there's a nefarious double-standard here in which they can say explicitly "this is not a contract" but if it were to go to court then legally it could be considered a de-facto contract since it has a signature.

Re: Contracts you should never sign

#284

Post by thwayunion » Thu, Feb 02, 2023, 4:01 PM UTC

listenallyall wrote: post #272

thwayunion wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

> Are you a lawyer?

No, and my posts are not legal advice.

> Or do you have a lawyer review every contract you sign?

Yes, and they provide me with legal advice specific to my situation.

> 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?

MA statute is very clearly written and its courts don't have a reputation for fucking around with legislative intent.