71–80 of 284 posts
Also verify that anything you're signing when you leave matches what you signed when you were hired. I recently left a company where, when I was hired, I had agreed in "Appendix C" not to recruit any of their employees away from them for a period of 12 months after separation. When I actually separated after more than two years, the "Appendix C" they wanted me to sign and presented as the one I had agreed to at hire…
Also verify that anything you're signing when you leave matches what you signed when you were hired. I recently left a company where, when I was hired, I had agreed in "Appendix C" not to recruit any of their employees away from them for a period of 12 months after separation. When I actually separated after more than two years, the "Appendix C" they wanted me to sign and presented as the one I had agreed to at hire…
I can believe that they're careless and used the wrong copy of a document but I'm not sure I understand why you're signing an agreement like that on exit: you've signed it on hiring so that regardless of the outcome of your employment, you're bound to the anti-poach. The only reason I can think that they'd ask you to sign the agreement again on exit is that they wanted to bind you into something new -- what explanati…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The second half of your argument here appears to be saying something that the commenter never mentioned.
Normally I 100% agree and this is, to me, one of the most important things that separates comments that are constructive from ones that are unfocused and all over the map. A lot of my own comment history is me making that same criticism. But in this case, I think they are identifying an implication of "not making generalities" which I find to be perfectly appropriate. It reminds me of the robolending scandal, and how…
I wonder how often non-compete clause are actually enforced. If I don't tell my employer what my next employer is and don't update my linkedin profile, I don't really see how it would actually works in practice.
In practice, they often only get enforced if you’re actually stealing customers and disrupting their business.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Computers are just office equipment, just like pens. If I gave you a pen and you wrote some story with it, then could I claim the rights to that story? I think not.
If you make that pen available to me under these conditions? Sure. If you "just give" me something without any conditions then no, you could definitely not claim that story. But if you make that pen, your property, available to me explicitly only for work and nothing else? It's your property, not mine. I only have whatever rights you grant me to it.
If I used the company computer to access a dating-website, then could the company claim ownership of my firstborn child, if that was in the contract?
Also verify that anything you're signing when you leave matches what you signed when you were hired. I recently left a company where, when I was hired, I had agreed in "Appendix C" not to recruit any of their employees away from them for a period of 12 months after separation. When I actually separated after more than two years, the "Appendix C" they wanted me to sign and presented as the one I had agreed to at hire…
> because why believe people are malicious when they could just as well be careless? When your job is to be careful, being careless is nothing but malicious.
> Anything you do with the company property, e.g., work computer, automatically belongs to the company, even if you do it on the weekends. That doesn't sound unacceptable to me. It's not that I'm that strict about e.g. reading personal emails etc. on my work computer, but if it's some side hustle, be it for money or for fun, I think it's honest to take your personal machine for that.
So now I have to lug around two of everything (laptop, phone etc) just because I might want to do something unrelated to work? It is completely unreasonable as a blanket statement.
It's not your equipment, you didn't buy it, you can't just do whatever you want with it. It's like being given a company car but going on a 3,000-mile roadtrip "because why should I have my own car if you gave me this one?"
It's not remotely unreasonable to expect someone not to use their employer's equipment to make money on the side, especially for something like a laptop which over the course of what a developer earns in 4-5 years is basically nothing.
> Anything you do with the company property, e.g., work computer, automatically belongs to the company, even if you do it on the weekends. That doesn't sound unacceptable to me. It's not that I'm that strict about e.g. reading personal emails etc. on my work computer, but if it's some side hustle, be it for money or for fun, I think it's honest to take your personal machine for that.
Computers are just office equipment, just like pens. If I gave you a pen and you wrote some story with it, then could I claim the rights to that story? I think not.
If a laptop is like a pen, what about a high end graphics workstation? What about a small server? Internet bandwidth is a cheap commodity, can I run my site from work? Electricity is basically free (I charge my personal scooter at work), what about a small Bitcoin miner?
> the best thing we as engineers can do is be aware of the types of contracts we're signing I'd argue that the best thing we can do is to not just make generalizations about what is OK to sign or not. Confidentiality agreements and non-competes are fine if they are narrowly focused, fair, and your compensation is sufficient to make it worth the restrictions. Because that is what a contract really is - a balancing act…