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

31–40 of 378 posts

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#31

Post by silverbax88 »

davedx wrote: post #8
badman_ting wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never been fired but I think of that as consulting. I have been asked for that kind of info on my way out, and said the same. I definitely would not be giving that out to to the company that just let me go.

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 for themselves, or for the company, or both.

5. They don't trust the company (or, possibly, the people they work with).

6. It isn't one item, or one incident, but over their time with the company, many little things that eroded their desire to work there. A person leaving today might have become fed up with the company two years ago when some botched project burned them or a manager handled something completely inappropriately. People don't usually just quit on the spot.

7. They want to work for themselves. Which means, they don't want to work for you. It really isn't you, it's them. (Wish them good luck and be sincere)

8. They can get a better deal (non-monetary) somewhere else and it outweighs the job. For young people, often the job is part of their identity. Once people get married and have kids (or just get a little older), they realize that working for someone else is not much of a reward. They may want a more flexible schedule, may want to just physically be closer to their home, any number of things that you may not be able to control.

9. You see them as a replaceable part and they know it. (Surprise!)

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#32

Post by joezydeco »

yusyusyus wrote: post #27
silverbax88 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, legally, they cannot say anything more than "He worked here from X to Y, that's all we can say". You don't need any agreement from them.

This is simple misinformation. Most places will only say that much so as to limit unnecessary liability but, in most locales, an entity is not explicitly prohibited from providing additional information with respect to performance, etc.

Right. A typical stealth question that is perfectly allowed is the "would you hire this person again?" question. It says a lot with one yes/no answer.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#33

Post by psaintla »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #11
300bps wrote: post #5

If I don’t agree to this nondisparagement clause, I will not receive my severance — in this case, the equivalent of two weeks of pay. For two weeks pay, I would not agree to anything. For two years pay, I would consider it. I had no idea that professionals were given such ridiculous offers and expected to sign off on them. At my last job, I was guaranteed 1 year of severance in the event of losing my job. Fortunately…

The choice of refusing money would be nice: Unfortunately, this type of severance isn't only happening in professional circles: Hourly call center employees (I'm sure among others) are being asked to sign the same type of thing, and these are $10-$11 an hour, high turnover jobs. This situation completely changes the power balance.

No it doesn't, two weeks pay at that salary doesn't get you anything unemployment won't cover.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#34

Post by perlpimp »

willvarfar wrote: post #16
bertil wrote: post #2

I’m puzzled by one thing, if risk management is the concern: why not replace that clause by a candid, confidential conversation on what is wrong with the company? Any significant issue most likely affects more than one employee, including remaining ones. It sounds typical of a culture driven by lawyers, rather than leaders.

Ah the notorious "exit interview"? Steer well well clear of them too! http://www.asktheheadhunter.com/haexit.htm

just say NO.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#35

Post by danielweber »

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 separation agreement. You aren't entitled to a severance payment. I'll tell other engineers that two weeks' salary is a piddly amount for the company for you to surrender such rights. You can just walk away. They are the ones who want you to sign that.

(It's kind of ironic, but after you have been given notice you are fired, you have power. They want you to do certain things, and what are they going to do? Fire you? Already did that. Withhold pay? Illegal.)

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#36

Post by a3n »

crusso wrote: post #4

The company is offering extra weeks of pay in return for not attacking them. Why is this different than getting paid to do your job or meet a contract in other respects?

You're being offered two weeks of pay for behavior that will last effectively forever.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#37

Post by Broken_Hippo »

psaintla wrote: post #33
Broken_Hippo wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The choice of refusing money would be nice: Unfortunately, this type of severance isn't only happening in professional circles: Hourly call center employees (I'm sure among others) are being asked to sign the same type of thing, and these are $10-$11 an hour, high turnover jobs. This situation completely changes the power balance.

No it doesn't, two weeks pay at that salary doesn't get you anything unemployment won't cover.

If you can survive the gap between getting paid and getting the unemployment, which is why most people will take it. I would do the same if I were back in the states considering the job market. Who knows when I'd find another similar paying job.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#38

Post by imgabe »

There's already established case law concerning libel and slander, do these not apply to corporations? This clause just seems like a way to give a company the option to sue you for anything at all, regardless of whether it caused them any damages.

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#39

Post by tostitos1979 »

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?

Re: Fired? Speak No Evil

#40

Post by dasil003 »

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…

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.

Post reply on HN