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

Dutch employee fired by U.S. firm for shutting off webcam awarded €75K in court

nltimes.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 466 posts

Re: Dutch employee fired by U.S. firm for shutting off webcam awarded €75K in court

#331

Post by unity1001 »

phpisthebest wrote: post #260
unity1001 wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Income Taxation is in no way voluntary exchange like that Take a weekend off and calculate how much 'fees' you would have to pay for 'private defense services', infrastructure, judiciary, police and all the other things if they were made private. > The fact is that the government, like a common thief, says to a person: Your money, or your life What religious delirium. > But the robbery is none the less a robbery on…

>Take a weekend off and calculate how much 'fees' you would have to pay for 'private defense services', infrastructure, judiciary, police and all the other things if they were made private. This assumes alot of things, like that I reject all forms of taxation which I dont just income based. You know this because you already replied to a comment where I layout my preferred public finance model which you also ignored i…

> This assumes alot of things, like that I reject all forms of taxation which I dont just income based. You know this because you already replied to a comment where I layout my preferred public finance model which you also ignored in that comment in favor of a semantic logical fallacy debate. so i question if you actually want to have an honest conversation

If non-income based taxation worked, societies would be using it. Every single form of taxation was tried throughout history. This is the one that works.

> That is a bit of projection there.

No. The ones who BELIEVE that things will 'just' be 'okay' if they just leave things to 'the market' are repeating the Christianity's format of faith. That there is a 'good god' that will just make everything 'okay'. That's why it is faith.

> Individualism is about the rejection of a "higher power", in your case this higher power is "the state" having replaced a god or gods

Organized, well equipped and trained authoritarian forces do not give zit about the rejection of their authority by the individual people. The moment you lose the guarantor of your freedom and rights - the democratically owned and controlled society - is the moment you are a subject of the strongest armed bunch nearby.

> Modern society was build by voluntary exchange of free individuals, not government.

The modern society was built by literally the organized French Revolutionaries deposing the aristocracy, making everyone equal and creating a social and legal system that ensured that. There hasn't been any 'voluntary exchange' of power on the side of armed, organized minority tyrants.

Neither the society was formed in American Wild West, where if you were upset with your local environment, you could just kill some more Indians and steal their land and prop yourself up on the stolen land in the most libertarian fashion.

Such philosophy is great while there is free land to take. The moment the free land runs out, things change. Just like how it happened at the end of 19th century in the US.

> the entire US model of government is build on the fact that freedoms and rights need to be protected FROM government

Yes. And that's why the US is in knee-deep sh*t. Becaue large slaveowners who had gigantic amount of land, wanted to protect their land from redistribution like how it was done to the deposed English nobility. Hence you got 'checks and balances' to prevent the democratic majority from asserting their will, with an openly declared intention by the architect of your constitution, John Adams, that the 'opulent' (rich) must be protected from the 'tyranny of the majority' (the people).

And as a result, you are killing your people when they cant pay for healthcare, 42 million working families are suffering hunger, you are still paying the $4 trillion Iraqi war debt that you accrued for the privilege of murdering 1 million Iraqis, and your infrastructure is failing.

But hey - the rich are far richer. So that is 'okay'.

Re: Dutch employee fired by U.S. firm for shutting off webcam awarded €75K in court

#332

Post by michaelmrose »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #316
jupp0r wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IANAL, but the person terminated would probably have some pretty good arguments in a US based lawsuit. More money to be awarded by the court in case he wins too.

I can't imagine what they would sue for in a US court. Most states are at will and refusal to comply with company policy and procedures is a one-way ticket out

Instead of re-litigating the employment issues couldn't they just sue to enforce the fact that they didn't pay their bill in the other suite? Also unless they have zero assets in the EU wouldn't other member states potentially be an option to seize said assets?

Re: Dutch employee fired by U.S. firm for shutting off webcam awarded €75K in court

#333

Post by Kranar »

denton-scratch wrote: post #281
nibbleshifter wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last time I got put on a PIP was for refusing an entirely unreasonable request to be on call, and leaving my work phone at home during that period. I started making plans to resign pretty soon after being put on the PIP.

I dunno, can't you just say "Dude, if you put me on the PIP, I'll have trouble leaving. Since what you're proposing amounts to disciplinary measures, I'll be quitting anyway; so why make it harder for me to get a new job?" The dismissal process for underperformance here (UK) requires the employer to give warnings: one verbal, and two written, I think. The employer is also expected to help the employee meet the perfor…

Quitting and getting terminated have very different consequences. Quitting does not entitle you to EI and could jeopardize severance/termination pay. To lose those benefits due to termination the termination must be for cause, which comes with a very high standard that an employer is exclusively required to justify.

Re: Dutch employee fired by U.S. firm for shutting off webcam awarded €75K in court

#334

Post by throwaway743 »

dusted wrote: post #329

I wonder how work culture will devolve from this kind of idea.. If I had a company, I'd much rather that my employees generate value, rather than "looking busy" and "working hard"

Those playing that game are usually managers using employees for the "perception" game and office politics/justifying their own position. It's nonsense.

My last manager was this type and was a big advocate for everyone returning to office, likely for playing this game.

Re: Dutch employee fired by U.S. firm for shutting off webcam awarded €75K in court

#335

Post by bernulli »

yibg wrote: post #321
RHSeeger wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's a lot of people that want things to be fair at the individual level ("that person gets time off for a child, but that other, childless person works the whole time")... but don't see the greater "benefit to society overall" part of it. It's not necessarily that they're being greedy; it may not even be something that would benefit them directly. They just never consider that they're paying a cost for th…

In some cases it’s probably legitimately “unfair”. Me for example am probably at the more unfair end. I - have high income so pay a large % into taxes - not a citizen so don’t enjoy some of the benefits of military protection - wasn’t raised here so didn’t use any of the earlier year services - likely won’t retire here so won’t use those either Most of my tax dollars goes to fund others in the country. But as a socie…

But you still benefit even from the mere _existence_ of human beings younger than you are (e.g. service, manufacturing, research, medical, etc.). If you think you don't, think about the fraction of people you will interact with in 20 or 40 years that are younger than you will be, or about the innovations you will be using in 20 or 40 years that were developed by people younger than you. Those human beings have to come from somewhere - why do you insist it my obligation to make you that gift, at exorbitant expense of my time and money?

Re: Dutch employee fired by U.S. firm for shutting off webcam awarded €75K in court

#336

Post by throwaway743 »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #202
sebazzz wrote: post #36

I love it when US companies meet Dutch labor laws.

> I love it when US companies meet Dutch labor laws. This is the first time I've heard of any US company requiring an employee to keep a camera on themselves 9 hours per day. Obviously, that's not some standard US company practice. I wouldn't be surprised if these same practices would fail in a US court.

Some in-office workers in US, usually unknowingly, have their desktop web cam and other monitoring tools recording them at all times. It's sad and disgusting to say the least.

Last employer did this without the status led turned on. They also recorded, keystrokes, push notifications attached to volume changes and media players, used sslstrip/mitm on web traffic, among other things.

Sadly, wouldn't be surprised if the same has carried over to remote.

Re: Dutch employee fired by U.S. firm for shutting off webcam awarded €75K in court

#337

Post by bernulli »

RHSeeger wrote: post #293
bernulli wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a simple word for people with that attitude: freeloader. It's pretty easy to understand: > I can not image the extra amount of work that get places on people that do not have children... What you're forgetting is the amount of work required to raise children. That's an externality that is only covered through a social contract, where everyone contributes to a next generation. Why should parents put in the ext…

I think there's a lot of people that want things to be fair at the individual level ("that person gets time off for a child, but that other, childless person works the whole time")... but don't see the greater "benefit to society overall" part of it. It's not necessarily that they're being greedy; it may not even be something that would benefit them directly. They just never consider that they're paying a cost for th…

It really is a tragedy of the commons with a changing demographic, where DINK are more prevalent that, say, 50 years ago, where most tried to contribute to raising the next generation. But the amount of entitlement still baffles me - where do these people think everyone younger than them comes from? How much time and money do they think it costs to train a human being to be a member of society, of benefit to them!, and why do they just assume it is someone else's duty to provide this to them, free of charge to them?

Re: Dutch employee fired by U.S. firm for shutting off webcam awarded €75K in court

#338

Post by csa »

phpisthebest wrote: post #130
blub wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PIPs are a tool for managing out employees that don’t perform well or don’t yield to often abusive company demands like e.g. overtime or pissed of somebody in management or connected to management.

Depends on the company but they are commonly used to ensure managers are not just firing someone that they are "pissed off" at, people are cynical about them but they are designed to ensure managers have to document the poor performance, and have notified the employee they are under performing... I have seen companies that lack this process and witnessed employees getting very positive feedback from managers even in…

> they are designed to ensure managers have to document the poor performance

I have had very close interactions (details below) with managers who completely fabricated “poor performance” in order to PIP the target out of a job.

In both cases, I had the PIP target secretly work in tandem with a star employee to produce work that was considered top notch work up and down the management chain.

In both cases, the manager took a cursory look at the work and completely dressed down the PIP target verbally and in writing with little or no constructive feedback.

One manager was fired, and the other manager was out to pasture to work on meaningless solo projects (necessary due to organizational reasons).

I am not sure how common this is, but managers who are slightly more intelligent about it can fairly easily set up a PIP target to fail while technically providing constructive feedback.

One of the cultural problems in this org was that pretty much 100% of the managers were bad/inexperienced/untrained, so the unwritten rule was to not monitor the administrative actions of other managers. I was brought in basically to protect them from potential lawsuits that would have had merit — they were incapable of doing this internally.

> I think the point is, if a company is going to abuse employee, that will happen with or with out a PIP

Agreed.

> but even with abusive management having that process IMO is better than not

Sort of, imho. What I always tell people is that they should consider their PIP period as a type of severance and look for another job aggressively while they are on it.

In the handful of orgs that do PIPs well, the folks will usually know that the process is not punitive. I will add that I am fairly certain they every relatively large org I’ve known that does PIPs well also gives folks an opportunity to transfer if the job is not a good fit (assuming the target is not a bad apple, which is a selection problem).

Anyway, I agree that PIPs could and should be an effective tool for remediation. That said, I am not sure it’s any better than undocumented managerial capriciousness and malfeasance since usually all it really does in these situations is slow down the bad behavior slightly.

If anyone gets randomly fired by a bad manager in an org with no PIP, they are probably better off just being out of the org in general rather than suffering for a few months in a sham.

Re: Dutch employee fired by U.S. firm for shutting off webcam awarded €75K in court

#339

Post by csa »

nibbleshifter wrote: post #186
phpisthebest wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, in most states in the US it would be illegal for an employer to reveal to another employer that the employee was on a PiP, I am surprised that is allowed in the EU with all the privacy laws. The US has lots of anti-black listing laws in almost every state that would make something like that very very illegal

Its also not legal in Germany, in fact, its pretty impossible to legally give a bad reference. HR departments have a workaround though - instead of a bad reference, they will simply confirm that yes, you worked there. Nothing else.

> HR departments have a workaround though - instead of a bad reference, they will simply confirm that yes, you worked there. Nothing else.

This works in the US as well.

Re: Dutch employee fired by U.S. firm for shutting off webcam awarded €75K in court

#340

Post by pram »

kube-system wrote: post #296
trynewideas wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also don't see how going through it reduces the stigma. The stigma exists _because_ of the experience, not the unfamiliarity of it. For instance, does the experience of going through US airport security ever reduce the stigma of it?

When you go through TSA, nobody thinks “oh, that person must be a terrorist because the TSA is screening them”. Because the TSA screens everyone. When someone is on a PIP, the expectation is “that person is about to get fired” This is the stigma we’re talking about.

Assuming PIP programs exist for any purpose other than establishing justification for termination.
Post reply on HN