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

231–240 of 378 posts

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#231

Post by spikels »

raganwald wrote: post #201

No disparagement clauses are a lot like non-compete clauses. I would never sign one, but at the same time, I am reluctant to speak poorly of a former employer or to go into direct competition with former colleagues. I want the right to do those things, but I don't actually want to do them. Now of course, they always say, "Yeah, maybe not you, but somebody." To which I say, "That's why you took so long to check my ref…

You say you want the right but never expect to use it. If that is the case it is probably not worth very much. Perhaps they can pay you something for it...

You don't have to sign severance agreements that give your rights and employers don't have to pay you severance over what is required by law. If those rights are worth more to you than the severance don't sign.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#232

Post by michaelochurch »

My general rule of thumb is that if the severance covers the expected time of the job search-- and allows you to represent yourself as employed during that time-- you should sign the non-disparagement clause and take the package. That's typically 2-3 months at lower levels, and 6+ months at higher levels. Offering nondisparagement is almost always worth it to move on with your career intact and your income undisrupted.

At 2 weeks, you should tell them to shove it. If they don't take care of you, you don't take care of them.

Honestly, I wish more people did tell the truth about ex-employers who treated them badly. The "never badmouth" rule makes severance payments low, reckless firings common, and bad corporate behavior a lot more prevalent than it should be.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#233

Post by wpietri »

logfromblammo wrote: post #170
chimeracoder wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IANAL, but while that may be true in general, California (where the author was employed[0]) is an at-will state, and most people reading HN (in fact, most people working at startups in general) are likely to be employed at-will. AFAIK, that means that they are not entitled to any severance unless their initial contract stipulated otherwise. [0] Actually, where the company was based we don't know which employment laws…

While working in at-will states, the severance agreement may in fact be the first document you sign that is actually legally binding upon the company in any way. Most offers I see are clear that the letter is not a contract, and no contract can even exist without direct and explicit intervention by the CEO. And that seems to be a left-handed way of saying that if you do try to get an actual contract, you will not be…

> It isn't unprofessional to abruptly walk out on the job if giving notice was never in the requirements.

I disagree. One of the things that distinguishes professional behavior for me is having professional standards. That is, no matter what your clients or employers do, there are certain ways you plan to behave. For me that would definitely include a good handover.

Of course, my professional standards also include refusing to build things that are obviously dumb, dangerous, or destructive. But a disturbing number of developers feel that they should just do whatever their bosses tell them, no matter the disaster that they set in motion. So one could argue that a lot of IT-related jobs are more trades than professions, in which case a "take this job and shove it" exit could be more acceptable. Not because it isn't unprofessional behavior, but because professional behavior isn't expected.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#234

Post by michaelochurch »

nathanb wrote: post #227
raganwald wrote: post #201

No disparagement clauses are a lot like non-compete clauses. I would never sign one, but at the same time, I am reluctant to speak poorly of a former employer or to go into direct competition with former colleagues. I want the right to do those things, but I don't actually want to do them. Now of course, they always say, "Yeah, maybe not you, but somebody." To which I say, "That's why you took so long to check my ref…

What offends me personally is the offering of money in exchange for signing the agreement. If I had a choice to sign the agreement or not, of my own free will and with no incentive, I may actually do so. Like you, I have no particular desire to speak ill of anyone, deservedly or not. Time spent disparaging a former employer is time which could have been better spent moving forward. But when you offer me an incentive…

But when you offer me an incentive for signing the contract? It makes me wonder why these rights I'm giving up are worth so much to the company. And feeling like I'm being bribed or pressured to do something is one of the best ways to manipulate me into not doing it, just because I'm so stubborn :)

You're looking at it the wrong way. There are two ways the company can approach it. The first: we need to let this person go, but we don't want to fuck up his career and personal life and we don't want him fucking up ours, so we'll give enough severance to cover the gap and a positive reference. And no lawyer will let the company offer severance without nonlitigation and nondisparagement. The second: fuck this guy, toss him overboard. Usually, when a good company does a layoff, it's the first. That's why they offer the severance. In part, it's to keep you from saying bad things about them. But it's also, at good companies, because they know it pays off in the long-term to have the people they laid off still feel some good will toward them. Careers are long.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#235

Post by cududa »

_delirium wrote: post #124

A friend summed it up like this: Modern employment. Can't speak freely before you have a job (social media vetting), can't speak freely in your own time while you have a job (clauses in your contract), can't speak freely when you no longer have a job.

You can speak as freely as you want - there's just a difference between public and private speech. It's your own choice to publicize your opinions on social media and the internet.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#236

Post by keypusher »

He wasn't fired, he was laid off. There are two types of employment termination, those where the employee is deemed at fault by the employer, and those where he is not. This guy was explicitly told that he was not a fault, and he was laid off due to burn rate at the company. Then he says he was fired? No. What difference does it make? When you are laid off there is often a severance package and you are eligible for unemployment benefits, some of which come out of your former employer's pocket. Therefore, you are still at least somewhat obligated to them financially. If you are fired, you are not eligible for either of these things.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Termination_of_employment

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#237

Post by vladd »

genwin wrote: post #226
raganwald wrote: post #201

No disparagement clauses are a lot like non-compete clauses. I would never sign one, but at the same time, I am reluctant to speak poorly of a former employer or to go into direct competition with former colleagues. I want the right to do those things, but I don't actually want to do them. Now of course, they always say, "Yeah, maybe not you, but somebody." To which I say, "That's why you took so long to check my ref…

I'd sign a non-compete clause for enough money in return. Same with a non-disparagement clause, especially if I had nothing bad to say. "Give me 6 weeks severance, instead of 2. Then I'll gladly sign it."

For me it's not about the amount of money but rather the freedom of speech restriction that you must remember for the rest of your life.

Human memory is a rather shady thing. How many of the university lectures do you still remember? Now imagine yourselves 10 years down the road, at a beer with other people getting asked about an event related to that company. Will you assume the rights of speech you forfeited for the rest of your life and remember them every time you will have the chance to speak differently?

When you're 80 and possibly with Alzheimer -- does that count too?

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#238

Post by loteck »

nathanb wrote: post #227
raganwald wrote: post #201

No disparagement clauses are a lot like non-compete clauses. I would never sign one, but at the same time, I am reluctant to speak poorly of a former employer or to go into direct competition with former colleagues. I want the right to do those things, but I don't actually want to do them. Now of course, they always say, "Yeah, maybe not you, but somebody." To which I say, "That's why you took so long to check my ref…

What offends me personally is the offering of money in exchange for signing the agreement. If I had a choice to sign the agreement or not, of my own free will and with no incentive, I may actually do so. Like you, I have no particular desire to speak ill of anyone, deservedly or not. Time spent disparaging a former employer is time which could have been better spent moving forward. But when you offer me an incentive…

Contract law requires there to be "consideration" (usually money) given when asking you to give something up, otherwise the contract can be found invalid. Please stop taking business matters so personally, they aren't trying to offend you.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#239

Post by ggchappell »

ibrad wrote: post #207
nemesisj wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love it whenever anyone insists something "isn't a big deal" or they don't care about it that much. I will simply say that it is a big deal to me, so if it's not a big deal to them, they might as well do it my way. This works in almost all cases, or the other party has to backtrack and then at least we're negotiating on more transparent terms.

So what happens when I sign and still rant about the company. Say on my blog. The company is already struggling financially it will cost them to fight back.

> So what happens when I sign and still rant about the company.

Then you've broken your word.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#240

Post by rickyc091 »

My case is pretty similar, but I caved and signed. For me, I wasn't fired, I quit, but I had to sign the same clause, except it was to receive my final paycheck. Oh yeah, my vacation days/pay were also stripped from me, even though I had already requested days off months before I had told them I would be leaving.
Post reply on HN