4 ms·

Option B is explicitly prohibited in your employment agreement for most salary workers. I would never consider working for a company that required me to violate

Option B is explicitly prohibited in your employment agreement for most salary workers. I would never consider working for a company that required me to violate a contract just for a chance to work there.

eropple 11y ago
"Most"? Anecdotally and all that, but I never signed a contract that stated that, across ~5 jobs. One tried and I got it redlined out before I started.
- kasey_junk 11y ago
  Anecdote to add, I've never across 20 years experience (and many jobs) not had a moonlighting clause in my employment agreement. As someone who hires, I'd be worried about the IP implications of even suggesting I pay them for outside work prior to them leaving their prior commitments.
  - eropple 11y ago
    Huh, interesting. I think I'd just walk if presented with a firm one. I constantly have other things going on, even when FT employed, and honestly no employer is going to pay me enough to constrain my options.
    - kasey_junk 11y ago
      I assumed it was boilerplate. For the record I've also never had an employer have a problem when I notified them of outside work. That might be different if the outside work in question was an interview for a new jib though...
maxaf 11y ago
In my experience this hasn't been the case. The closest I've come was an employment contract that required me to notify my employer of any work on the side. This has happened only once over more than a decade of work in this industry.
- arjie 11y ago
  GitLab has an employment offer example up on their website¹. Here's the part that's relevant to the discussion: > While you render services to the Company, you will not engage in any other gainful employment, business or activity without the written consent of the Company. While you render services to the Company, you also will not assist any person or organization in competing with the Company, in preparing to compete with the Company or in hiring any employees of the Company. I'm sure we can have both charitable and strict interpretations of "while you render services to the Company" but only a lawyer can probably tell what that means. Did you not have such a clause? ¹ https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/contracts/ https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/contracts/
  - sytse 11y ago
    I do not think we would make a problem if people did a paid technical interview somewhere else, it doesn't make sense to me. On the other hand it is hard to write an exception for this, but merge requests are welcome. Are technical interviews work on real world problems, the work is not paid and the code is open source. You can opt for an alternative if you want, see https://about.gitlab.com/jobs/ https://about.gitlab.com/jobs/
- superuser2 11y ago
  "During your Employment, you shall devote your full business efforts and time to the Company. During your Employment, without written permission from the Chief Executive officer, or one of his direct reports, you shall not render services in any capacity for any other person or entity and shall not act as sole proprietor or parter of any other person or entity..." As I understand it, this is pretty much the nature of being salaried (as opposed to hourly).
rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
Wow, all I can say is that sucks to be you. I work in higher ed now, and I can do whatever I want outside of normal hours, as long as it doesn't interfere with the work I was hired to do. One benefit of having firmly rejected Silicon Valley is that I'm no longer at the whim of jealous employers who know I could find another job across the bay at any time and keep my home and social circles.
- darryl42 11y ago
  Most jobs at tech companies will have a clause in your contract about owning everything that you do or think of while employed.
  - maxaf 11y ago
    This is true of work you do on company equipment during work hours. If things were as you describe, no one would ever be able to do open source, let alone sign standard FOSS CLAs or the like.
    - sjf 11y ago
      Don't over-generalize, both of the big tech companies I've worked at in the last 10 years have this clause and require _explicit_ specific approval for any outside work, open source or not. Otherwise, yes, according to the contract it is their property. The enforceability of this debatable, but it is most definitely something that happens.
  - st3v3r 11y ago
    Not in sane states (read: California). Well, sane in this thing, at least.
st3v3r 11y ago
I believe those clauses are completely unethical in the first place, so I wouldn't have a problem.
- kasey_junk 11y ago
  But you sign them and take money from the people offering them?
  - st3v3r 11y ago
    So? For one, I live in California, where those clauses are not enforceable. If they want to put illegal stuff in their contracts, that's not my fault.
    - kasey_junk 11y ago
      Saying they are not enforceable & saying that they are completely risk free for a potential hirer who wants to pay a nominal payment for coding exercises are 2 different things, especially considering that conflict of interest laws are enforceable. As for the ethics of it, I find it odd that you are fine with working for someone who uses something you are vehemently against, but hey to each their own.
desdiv 11y ago
What's the difference between Option B and onsite whiteboard coding? Aren't you violating your employment contract all the same?

eropple 11y ago

"Most"? Anecdotally and all that, but I never signed a contract that stated that, across ~5 jobs. One tried and I got it redlined out before I started.

kasey_junk 11y ago
Anecdote to add, I've never across 20 years experience (and many jobs) not had a moonlighting clause in my employment agreement. As someone who hires, I'd be worried about the IP implications of even suggesting I pay them for outside work prior to them leaving their prior commitments.
- eropple 11y ago
  Huh, interesting. I think I'd just walk if presented with a firm one. I constantly have other things going on, even when FT employed, and honestly no employer is going to pay me enough to constrain my options.
  - kasey_junk 11y ago
    I assumed it was boilerplate. For the record I've also never had an employer have a problem when I notified them of outside work. That might be different if the outside work in question was an interview for a new jib though...

maxaf 11y ago

In my experience this hasn't been the case. The closest I've come was an employment contract that required me to notify my employer of any work on the side. This has happened only once over more than a decade of work in this industry.

arjie 11y ago
GitLab has an employment offer example up on their website¹. Here's the part that's relevant to the discussion: > While you render services to the Company, you will not engage in any other gainful employment, business or activity without the written consent of the Company. While you render services to the Company, you also will not assist any person or organization in competing with the Company, in preparing to compete with the Company or in hiring any employees of the Company. I'm sure we can have both charitable and strict interpretations of "while you render services to the Company" but only a lawyer can probably tell what that means. Did you not have such a clause? ¹ https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/contracts/ https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/contracts/
- sytse 11y ago
  I do not think we would make a problem if people did a paid technical interview somewhere else, it doesn't make sense to me. On the other hand it is hard to write an exception for this, but merge requests are welcome. Are technical interviews work on real world problems, the work is not paid and the code is open source. You can opt for an alternative if you want, see https://about.gitlab.com/jobs/ https://about.gitlab.com/jobs/
superuser2 11y ago
"During your Employment, you shall devote your full business efforts and time to the Company. During your Employment, without written permission from the Chief Executive officer, or one of his direct reports, you shall not render services in any capacity for any other person or entity and shall not act as sole proprietor or parter of any other person or entity..." As I understand it, this is pretty much the nature of being salaried (as opposed to hourly).

rm_-rf_slash 11y ago

Wow, all I can say is that sucks to be you. I work in higher ed now, and I can do whatever I want outside of normal hours, as long as it doesn't interfere with the work I was hired to do. One benefit of having firmly rejected Silicon Valley is that I'm no longer at the whim of jealous employers who know I could find another job across the bay at any time and keep my home and social circles.

darryl42 11y ago
Most jobs at tech companies will have a clause in your contract about owning everything that you do or think of while employed.
- maxaf 11y ago
  This is true of work you do on company equipment during work hours. If things were as you describe, no one would ever be able to do open source, let alone sign standard FOSS CLAs or the like.
  - sjf 11y ago
    Don't over-generalize, both of the big tech companies I've worked at in the last 10 years have this clause and require _explicit_ specific approval for any outside work, open source or not. Otherwise, yes, according to the contract it is their property. The enforceability of this debatable, but it is most definitely something that happens.
- st3v3r 11y ago
  Not in sane states (read: California). Well, sane in this thing, at least.

st3v3r 11y ago

I believe those clauses are completely unethical in the first place, so I wouldn't have a problem.

kasey_junk 11y ago
But you sign them and take money from the people offering them?
- st3v3r 11y ago
  So? For one, I live in California, where those clauses are not enforceable. If they want to put illegal stuff in their contracts, that's not my fault.
  - kasey_junk 11y ago
    Saying they are not enforceable & saying that they are completely risk free for a potential hirer who wants to pay a nominal payment for coding exercises are 2 different things, especially considering that conflict of interest laws are enforceable. As for the ethics of it, I find it odd that you are fine with working for someone who uses something you are vehemently against, but hey to each their own.

desdiv 11y ago

What's the difference between Option B and onsite whiteboard coding? Aren't you violating your employment contract all the same?