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

Fired? Speak No Evil

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 378 posts

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#61

Post by 3pt14159 »

tostitos1979 wrote: post #39
alextingle wrote: post #20

I wouldn't sign that any more than I'd sign a contract that gave the company everything that I produce in my own time. Both are attempts by the corporation to dissolve my agency as a human being. The only right answer is no.

Such contracts ("produced on own-time belongs to company") are common at large software companies. If you are in California, such a contract may not hold water. Any one have experience with a big co (outside Cali) where they were able to negotiate this clause away?

I've never agreed to these since graduating university. One time someone tried to get me to sign that anything I invented for the next 3 years that was related would be their property.

I've found three good pushback techniques:

1. "My [insert family member] is a lawyer and I haven't seen this clause before, so I'm going to get her to read over the agreement." Next day I just say that they won't let me sign it. Why make up a family member as a lawyer? Because to push back or hire a lawyer is viewed as an aggressive move, while affably showing deference to your family member isn't.

Later in life when the job / contract offers started getting bigger:

2. "I don't sign things I don't intend to follow and I'm going to be building things in this industry on my own time for my own profit." Strait up confidence along with the fuck-you attitude to back it up by walking away. I'm never going to work for someone that is that dense and short sighted anyway.

Every single company has allowed me to just strike out the clause and have us both initial it.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#62

Post by JackFr »

alextingle wrote: post #20

I wouldn't sign that any more than I'd sign a contract that gave the company everything that I produce in my own time. Both are attempts by the corporation to dissolve my agency as a human being. The only right answer is no.

No they're not. From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consideration

Consideration is something of value given by a promissor to a promisee in exchange for something of value given by a promisee to a promissor. Typically, the thing of value is a payment, although it may be an act, or forbearance to act.

Paying you not to speak is no more an attempt to dissolve your human agency than paying you to speak. Assuming you have nothing disparaging to say, not agreeing is foolish.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#63

Post by moepstar »

silverbax88 wrote: post #31
davedx wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You refuse exit interviews even when you are the one who's decided to leave?

Companies could save themselves a lot of pretense with exit interviews and just assume the following: If a good person leaves your company, it is because of one or more of the following: 1. You can't (or won't) pay them as much as someone else. 2. They aren't happy in the culture of your company. 3. They aren't happy with the type of work they are doing. 4. They don't see a bright future with your company - either fo…

Companies, CEOs and other executives should print this a thousand times and put it up on their walls.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#64

Post by tostitos1979 »

[deleted] wrote: post #46
tostitos1979 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such contracts ("produced on own-time belongs to company") are common at large software companies. If you are in California, such a contract may not hold water. Any one have experience with a big co (outside Cali) where they were able to negotiate this clause away?

[deleted]

Thanks for your data point. But I presume this was a small to medium sized company? At Big Co. HR is a faceless organization and I'm curious if people have succeeded negotiating with this beast?

I'm also curious: did you negotiate this after they offered you a job? It seems frustrating to get the job first and then turn it down because it never met your requirements? Is it reasonable to ask a potential employer about their own-time policy during the interview phase?

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#65

Post by dec0dedab0de »

Lets say you were to sign something like this, but then 10 years later the company completely changed direction and their new business plan was stealing candy from babies. Then you wrote something about how horrible the company is now. What kind of recourse would this contract let them take on you? Would you just have to pay the 2 weeks salary back to them?

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#66

Post by chrisbennet »

I wonder if you could head this off contractually when you start a new job? Something like adding "Severance pay will not be made conditional on limitations of free speech." to the contract that you and your employer sign when you start a new job.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#67

Post by TheBiv »

chris_wot wrote: post #47

Two things wrong here: 1. Isn't this against the U.S. Constitutional right to free speech? 2. I'd say that if you had this signed then it would be under duress. Not sure how this can be enforceable!

The Constitution only stipulates your right to free speech against the government.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#68

Post by poopsintub »

neohaven wrote: post #55
danielweber wrote: post #35

And I was soon informed that the president wished to assure me that there is nothing unusual about such clauses Whoop whoop whoop! This sets off giant alarm bells in my head. It might be totally normal. That doesn't mean you should sign it. It's also an older-than-dirt salesman tactic to say that something you just made up is "totally common." Of course, the company can attach whatever clauses it wants to a separatio…

Depending on where you are, "severance", or the 2-week pay after you have been told you do not have a job anymore, may or may not be a worker's right.

I've never heard of severance in the U.S. being mandatory or illegal to withhold if say, they did it for every other employee that left the company prior. I think unemployment benefits takes care of this.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#70

Post by kohanz »

silverbax88 wrote: post #52
dasil003 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So rather than ask the person like a grownup they should wildly speculate in order to make everyone less uncomfortable? I mean you have a list of 9 reasons off the top of your head and it's just the tip of the iceberg.

Name another reason that doesn't fall under those nine. I'm honestly not trying to argue, just asking. There aren't really that many reasons why people leave. People leave because they aren't happy or aren't getting paid enough or they have a personal situation that dictates it. There are really just 3 reasons but I elaborated because I expected people to start chiming in with all of the reasons I missed.

Those reasons are so vague, though. Alright, so "people aren't happy", how should I go about fixing that as an employer? Step 1: find out what they are unhappy about. Hence the exit interview.

IMHO, this information should be gathered well before exit, e.g. through regular 1-on-1's, but that's another discussion.

Post reply on HN