4 ms·

Why would it only feel fair based on some "arbitrary" rules you intuitively feel are right? Why not let people negotiate based on their personal situations, and

by edanm 9y ago

Why would it only feel fair based on some "arbitrary" rules you intuitively feel are right? Why not let people negotiate based on their personal situations, and let the market eventually sort out what combination works best? After all, for high enough salaries, I'd probably agree to very onerous terms. Specfically about your list, I think the reason the period doesn't usually start from the end of training, but rather the end of employment, is that it is assumed you continue to have access to more training / more confidential information, even if you work for a company for longer than the few months of training. And I certainly hope most people work in a job in which they continue to grow/learn. As for voiding if the contract if the employee is fired, why make that a condition? Wouldn't that just mean the bar for hiring new employees would be even higher, because if they don't work out, you're both wasting lots of investment, and also running the risk of them taking your methods to a new company?

Macha 9y ago
> Why would it only feel fair based on some "arbitrary" rules you intuitively feel are right? Why not let people negotiate based on their personal situations, and let the market eventually sort out what combination works best? Because the best solution from an economic position can involve screwing over people in more vulnerable positions? From TFA we have manual labourers and QC workers in a factory being forced into non-competes. These are not people with much power in the free market. > Wouldn't that just mean the bar for hiring new employees would be even higher, because if they don't work out, you're both wasting lots of investment, and also running the risk of them taking your methods to a new company? I mean, if they sucked at following the methods to the point you let them go, surely their attempt at bringing them to a new company would likely backfire

by edanm 9y ago

Macha 9y ago

> Why would it only feel fair based on some "arbitrary" rules you intuitively feel are right? Why not let people negotiate based on their personal situations, and let the market eventually sort out what combination works best? Because the best solution from an economic position can involve screwing over people in more vulnerable positions? From TFA we have manual labourers and QC workers in a factory being forced into non-competes. These are not people with much power in the free market. > Wouldn't that just mean the bar for hiring new employees would be even higher, because if they don't work out, you're both wasting lots of investment, and also running the risk of them taking your methods to a new company? I mean, if they sucked at following the methods to the point you let them go, surely their attempt at bringing them to a new company would likely backfire