5 ms·

In what country can an employer dictate what you do in your own time? Just because an employer puts somethings in a contract doesn't make it legal.

coffeeaddicted 17y ago
In Germany it's a common clause in contracts. And it's valid if the work you do in your spare-time might affect the work you do for your day-job. For example because it makes you too tired to concentrate in your daily work.
- markkanof 17y ago
  Wow, glad I don't live in Germany then. So do they also forbid late night snacks, because it might cause you to sleep poorly and be to tired to work?
  - gizmo 17y ago
    There are a lot of rules and regulations, and you can't just fire somebody in Germany. So some kind of rules are needed so employers can defer to when they want to get rid of an employee. In many cases when an employer wants to get rid of an employee for a reason that isn't covered by the employment contract he has to request permission from a local judge (small claims court equivalent)... and even then the judge can determine an outrageous "termination fee". So although the rules like these look draconian, they're sort of needed to keep the power between employer and employee in balance.
- nkohari 17y ago
  It's also very common in the US, but it's largely unenforceable unless the company can demonstrate a legitimate conflict of interest. (IANAL)
  - MrFoof 17y ago
    It may be largely unenforceable, but there's nothing preventing them from hauling you into court over it to keep their legal counsel entertained and to drain you of your savings. I can say from experience that this is a less-than-desirable outcome. You've wisely chosen to not ruffle any more feathers there. Just behave and get out when you can.
  - gte910h 17y ago
    It completely depends on the US state. It is unenforceable in California, but usually enforceable in say, Massachusetts
pavel_lishin 17y ago
From the OP, it sounds like it wasn't even in the contract. I understand non-compete clauses, but this doesn't seem to apply here.
- logicalmind 17y ago
  And not only that, but a verbal contract cannot modify a written contract. At least in US law. So he is only bound by what is written in the contract he signed, not what was said outside the bounds of that contract.
  - eru 17y ago
    In, say, Germany a verbal contract is as good as a written contract, as far as I know. (And both situations aren't really applicable to the Netherlands, anyway.)
    - logicalmind 17y ago
      I wasn't saying a verbal contract is not as good as a written one, I was just saying a verbal contract cannot amend a written one. ie. If he signs a contract stating he can work independently on nights/weekends, they cannot amend that contract verbally and change their minds. Amendments to written contracts must be agreed upon by both parties in writing. Though I'm not sure if this applies in the Netherlands...
      - eru 17y ago
        Interesting. In the German system the oral addition stands above the written contract. The written contract is considered boiler-plate by the courts and the oral addition is more specific, and bears more weight. Of course all parties have to agree to amend a contract. So just the employer changing their mind wouldn't cut it. The Netherlands is a civil law country, so the German standard might be closer to what they have than the common law American standard. Labour relations and law are of course a strange thing in themselves.
run4yourlives 17y ago
In the US this is legal (in certain states), at least with regards to IP and other assets that the company may see as being in their interests. In Canada this practice is not legally supported, but still relatively common.
- ewjordan 17y ago
  It may be legal, but it still has to be explicitly agreed to, correct? And employer doesn't have a default claim on all IP generated by their employees outside of work hours, I would hope. Maybe I'm paranoid, but just to cover my ass, these days any time I agree to anything with just about anyone, I insist on adding an explicit clause that makes it clear that I am free to work on any other project with no restrictions (I specifically retain the right to compete), and that except for the works specifically covered by the contract, the other party has no claim or license to any intellectual property that I own or create. Then again, that's par for the course when it comes to work-for-hire, it's been a long time since I've signed an employment contract as an employee, and I doubt those additions would fly as easily in that circumstance...still always worth a shot, though, companies will often agree to change details of contracts for you as long as they don't feel they're getting screwed by the changes.
  - run4yourlives 17y ago
    I believe so, yes. It needs to be part of the contract.

coffeeaddicted 17y ago

In Germany it's a common clause in contracts. And it's valid if the work you do in your spare-time might affect the work you do for your day-job. For example because it makes you too tired to concentrate in your daily work.

markkanof 17y ago
Wow, glad I don't live in Germany then. So do they also forbid late night snacks, because it might cause you to sleep poorly and be to tired to work?
- gizmo 17y ago
  There are a lot of rules and regulations, and you can't just fire somebody in Germany. So some kind of rules are needed so employers can defer to when they want to get rid of an employee. In many cases when an employer wants to get rid of an employee for a reason that isn't covered by the employment contract he has to request permission from a local judge (small claims court equivalent)... and even then the judge can determine an outrageous "termination fee". So although the rules like these look draconian, they're sort of needed to keep the power between employer and employee in balance.
nkohari 17y ago
It's also very common in the US, but it's largely unenforceable unless the company can demonstrate a legitimate conflict of interest. (IANAL)
- MrFoof 17y ago
  It may be largely unenforceable, but there's nothing preventing them from hauling you into court over it to keep their legal counsel entertained and to drain you of your savings. I can say from experience that this is a less-than-desirable outcome. You've wisely chosen to not ruffle any more feathers there. Just behave and get out when you can.
- gte910h 17y ago
  It completely depends on the US state. It is unenforceable in California, but usually enforceable in say, Massachusetts

pavel_lishin 17y ago

From the OP, it sounds like it wasn't even in the contract. I understand non-compete clauses, but this doesn't seem to apply here.

logicalmind 17y ago
And not only that, but a verbal contract cannot modify a written contract. At least in US law. So he is only bound by what is written in the contract he signed, not what was said outside the bounds of that contract.
- eru 17y ago
  In, say, Germany a verbal contract is as good as a written contract, as far as I know. (And both situations aren't really applicable to the Netherlands, anyway.)
  - logicalmind 17y ago
    I wasn't saying a verbal contract is not as good as a written one, I was just saying a verbal contract cannot amend a written one. ie. If he signs a contract stating he can work independently on nights/weekends, they cannot amend that contract verbally and change their minds. Amendments to written contracts must be agreed upon by both parties in writing. Though I'm not sure if this applies in the Netherlands...
    - eru 17y ago
      Interesting. In the German system the oral addition stands above the written contract. The written contract is considered boiler-plate by the courts and the oral addition is more specific, and bears more weight. Of course all parties have to agree to amend a contract. So just the employer changing their mind wouldn't cut it. The Netherlands is a civil law country, so the German standard might be closer to what they have than the common law American standard. Labour relations and law are of course a strange thing in themselves.

run4yourlives 17y ago

In the US this is legal (in certain states), at least with regards to IP and other assets that the company may see as being in their interests. In Canada this practice is not legally supported, but still relatively common.

ewjordan 17y ago
It may be legal, but it still has to be explicitly agreed to, correct? And employer doesn't have a default claim on all IP generated by their employees outside of work hours, I would hope. Maybe I'm paranoid, but just to cover my ass, these days any time I agree to anything with just about anyone, I insist on adding an explicit clause that makes it clear that I am free to work on any other project with no restrictions (I specifically retain the right to compete), and that except for the works specifically covered by the contract, the other party has no claim or license to any intellectual property that I own or create. Then again, that's par for the course when it comes to work-for-hire, it's been a long time since I've signed an employment contract as an employee, and I doubt those additions would fly as easily in that circumstance...still always worth a shot, though, companies will often agree to change details of contracts for you as long as they don't feel they're getting screwed by the changes.
- run4yourlives 17y ago
  I believe so, yes. It needs to be part of the contract.