241–250 of 391 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep. More to the point, when a letter from a lawyer comes in, they're going to ask their lawyer for his opinion, and he is going to say "#$()! Why did you send that!?! That drastically complicates things for me. Just pay the kid or we're going to run up quite the bill fighting him and may yet lose ." (If you don't understand why that email is radioactive, here is a joking-but-not-really exhaustive list of things US c…
Did you forget a link?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No they cannot refuse to send him his last paycheck. I can't speak for the paperwork involved when leaving Miso, but most companies make you sign an agreement (often in the exit interview) that you are not entitled to/owed anything more than X, Y, Z items that are explicitly stated (which usually included the last paycheck and any unpaid vacation days).
Huh. Why would anyone sign such a thing?
Most companies that have this agreement in place also have a similar agreement when joining the company that if you forego signing the exit agreement, you forego any outstanding debts owed to you by the company.
I'd like to point out something: I'm pretty sure the OP is smart enough to know this move could cost him dearly in the future. He's basically setting himself at the 'stake', next to Miso, with his post. This is why we have to pay a bit more attention than just dismissing his claim and label him childish. Doesn't matter who's right/wrong, the OP felt this was an issue worth risking his rep for (just by posting, he's a…
Even saying that it could cost him seems like empty threats from the peanut gallery. On what basis, that someone might not want to hire him because they plan to rip him off?
Do I think he's in the wrong with Miso, absolutely not. He has, on the surface at least, a legitimate grievance. He should have, however, handled this matter with a legal mechanism vs. a blog post.
When I hire, I have to look at the risk that a prospect is the type of person who will air his/her beefs in a blog post after he/she leaves the company. Which is why I spend time doing searches of everyone who makes my short list.
While I do think the OP has a legitimate beef, the outcome was predictable and preventable. If the OP was smart and had any work experience, he would have known to make any claims to any outstanding money before even signalling that he was going to leave. Companies, especially small ones, tend to be petty about dealing with former employees.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Huh. Why would anyone sign such a thing?
Usual practice in most companies. It protects them from exactly these sorts of things. Most companies that have this agreement in place also have a similar agreement when joining the company that if you forego signing the exit agreement, you forego any outstanding debts owed to you by the company.
There's also the question of labor laws. I bet this is considered wages under the law and probably impossible to sign away.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assure you I'm not being one sided here; jzhwu and Miso clearly didn't part on good terms. It seems he's at least mildly incompetant. And he's clearly profane and confrontational. It's entirely plausible that the leadership team at Miso hates this guys guts for valid reasons and doesn't want to pay him a cent they don't have to. And if this was a forgotten poster from his office or a lost book, no one would care. B…
Yes, debt can be (and usually is) zeroed out when you leave a company. As I explained in another comment, most companies (don't know about Miso) make you sign an agreement during your exit interview that the company does not owe you anything except X, Y, Z items that are enumerated clearly (these usually include your last paycheck and check for unpaid vacation days).
So basically: I agree. But what does that have to do with the points I was responding to? Earlier you stated clearly that he was "not entitled to anything from the company when he's no longer an employee". Are you walking that back now?
"Because you are no longer employed by Miso, you are not eligible for this bonus." I must say, I completely agree. This is how it works. Your referral bonus is a perk, and nothing more. You didn't claim it. They weren't on top of it. You both failed here. But then you quit. And you left without it. That sucks for you, but they owe you nothing.
> "Your referral bonus is a perk" It seems your argument centers on this point, which is conjecture on your part, at best. Can you explain how you came to this conclusion?
At my company, all bonuses are considered discretionary. They plainly and clearly lay out the parameters of the bonus structure, but they also reserve the right to withhold the bonus for any reason. They rarely reign in on their promise as it significantly hurts morale. However it is well known that if you leave the company before a bonus is paid out, that you will not receive the money, regardless of whether or not you have already fulfilled the parameters for the bonus.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I respect what you're saying, but it's a bit naive. First of all, how do you know that the facts that were mentioned were facts? Were you CC'ed on any of the emails? For all we know, the author made the conversation up. Secondly, nobody really likes hiring someone who speaks negatively about a former employer. Especially when there's no way to verify whether what they are saying is true.
I'd rather not post original emails and screenshots supporting my claims. If verification is demanded by the majority I'll comply.
I personally could care less whether you posted screenshots or not. But if you were considering employing someone and found that they had posted something like this (with little to no evidence), what would your reaction be? Heck, what would your reaction be if it did have screenshots?
"Name and shame" is a thorny issue. Opponents are right in the same way you shouldn't badmouth former employers in job interviewers. It's not fair but it makes you look worse. You just kind of have to suck it up and move on. When companies screw you out of money, you should name and shame them (IMHO). Trust me, over the years I've probably lost out on all told $50,000 or more that people never paid. In some cases it…
I had never expected to see such reaction from so many HN characters. That's a long list of people I wish never to do business with.
First step after an employer says no to paying you money owed should ALWAYS be a letter on dead tree saying exactly what your email said, signed by your lawyer. You'll come out $9,700 ahead because folks understand that fobbing off lawyers has consequences. Your lawyer would have printed out email #2 ("You nuked a DB. Screw you."), called it a pretext to deny you rightfully earned wages , and told the company to have…
Legal action is expensive for everyone, so most companies threatened with it will just send a check in the mail with a contract saying "don't sue us again." Any smart businessperson will check emotions at the door and do what's best for the company.
The exception to this is if someone at the company does take it personally and actually decides to fight it, in which case you then cut your losses and move on...but never roll over without at least getting your lawyer to write up a letter saying "fuck you, pay me."
I understand it's emotionally nerve racking to be involved in litigation, but as someone who has been involved in a few lawsuits, it's very worth it to your wallet and self-esteem if you don't just shrug your shoulders and say "gee, it's only $10K."