Live data from Hacker News

Fired? Speak No Evil

nytimes.com

361–370 of 378 posts

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, they have to get a court to decide that, now don't they.

Courts decide legal issues. If you give your word that you'll refrain from doing something, and then you do it, then you've broken your word, regardless of legalities.

If I signed the contract, I said I would refrain of disparagement. If I was subsequently critical of the firm and the company thought it rose to disparagement, it becomes a legal issue.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's fine with me. They sound like the type of people I'd rather not spend much time talking to anyway.

People who would get offended if you called their kid ugly are not the kind of people you'd want to spend time with? That's basically every person on earth.

Thinking that something is not beautiful is not the same thing as thinking that something is ugly. And there is a pretty obvious (though not to you, apparently) difference between being asked that question and me responding honestly, and me simply remarking, unprovoked, "boy, that kid sure looks pretty damn ugly, don't he?"

The kind of people I want to spend my time around are those who prefer honest questions and honest answers, as opposed to those simply soliciting me for a bit of verbal fellatio.

Is that clear enough for you?

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#363
A few years ago, my law school classmate turned down a lengthy severance to avoid signing one of these after a bitter termination. Instead, he took a job in the building's coffee shop. He'd see people he used to see all the time, and when they'd ask what happened, he'd tell them all about the horrible way he was treated by the firm, etc.

The firm ended up giving him a bunch more money to shut up and quit the barrista job.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When an employer treats the employee unprofessionally, is that not an indication that professional behavior is not expected? If you have an expectation that your employer will provide notice and severance before termination, as might be specified in an employee handbook and verified by departing colleages, then giving notice before resignation would be appropriate. If, on the other hand, your company has in the past…

No. If ethics are purely determined by how other people act, they aren't ethics. I think that professionals have to be careful in who they choose to work for, but once they start, they should act professionally. That includes leaving professionally.

If you don't make some allowance for other people's behavior in your ethical system, your ethical strategy can easily be subverted by someone else that does.

In game theory simulations, strategies that respond to counterparty behaviors, such as tit-for-tat, always outperform those that do not, such as always-cooperate, always-reneg, and random-choice strategies.

Your strategy is apparently always-cooperate. It's a loser. If you do not penalize bad behavior or unbalanced deals, they will become more prevalent in the environment.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#365
post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> t isn't unprofessional to abruptly walk out on the job if giving notice was never in the requirements. Depends on circumstances and the details of your profession. If you're just a badly-treated wage slave, then definitely: walk out as soon as you find something better. But I'm an independent contractor/freelancer, and I'm currently working on a project that would probably take about a year. But my contract is alwa…

It seems to me that a project that should take a year should have contracts that last for the entire duration.

If we're talking about professionalism, at what point did you bring up to the client that their quarterly contracting strategy leaves them extremely vulnerable to losing critical personnel before the work gets finished? I think what happened there is that they leveraged their project management flexibility against your sense of integrity, and you lost.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#366
what was that last part...except as allowed by law (approx.).....hmmmm, so by law one has the freedom of speech...so as long as there is not the contents of slander or fighting words in any utterance made by the fired employee, then it sounds like they got frazzled by some legal masturbation...the clause means nothing...

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#367
what was that last part...except as allowed by law (approx.).....hmmmm, so by law one has the freedom of speech...so as long as there is not the contents of slander or fighting words in any utterance made by the fired employee, then it sounds like they got frazzled by some legal masturbation...the clause means nothing...

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#368
what was that last part...except as allowed by law (approx.).....hmmmm, so by law one has the freedom of speech...so as long as there is not the contents of slander or fighting words in any utterance made by the fired employee, then it sounds like they got frazzled by some legal masturbation...the clause means nothing...

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#369
what was that last part...except as allowed by law (approx.).....hmmmm, so by law one has the freedom of speech...so as long as there is not the contents of slander or fighting words in any utterance made by the fired employee, then it sounds like they got frazzled by some legal masturbation...the clause means nothing...

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#370
what was that last part...except as allowed by law (approx.).....hmmmm, so by law one has the freedom of speech...so as long as there is not the contents of slander or fighting words in any utterance made by the fired employee, then it sounds like they got frazzled by some legal masturbation...the clause means nothing...
Post reply on HN