10 ms·

The important bit: How did IBM get around the legal requirement for the disclosures? With a move that even critics acknowledge is ingenious. The company’s pre

• gcb0 9y ago
  wow! I had no idea forced arbitration could trump labour laws. ...oh wait, US has none of that.
  • pjmlp 9y ago
    The irony being that it was one of the countries once upon a time known for actually having them (starting in 1886).
• venuur 9y ago
  FYI, your quote renders as a fixed-width font code block and does not word wrap on mobile. It makes the text very hard to read. For mobile user’s benefit, a different quotation method would be better.
  • notyourwork 9y ago
    I agree but this is how a quoted block is rendered on this site. Its fine for desktop but almost completely unusable on a mobile phone since you have to scroll horizontally to read each line.
    • dragonwriter 9y ago
      > I agree but this is how a quoted block is rendered on this site. No, it's how a code block is rendered on this site. Abusing that for quotes is not really a good idea. (It's not that great for code, either, but it's tolerable for very small snippets, and the ones it's not good for are probably better hosted elsewhere and linked than embedded in a comment anyway.)
  • buro9 9y ago
    I would love for HN to support some type of mark up that could actually render a quote block properly. ( @dan ) > But it doesn't have one AFAIK. It's not markdown, and the only thing we have is a code block. I've re-formatted for an even slimmer screen :D
    • protomyth 9y ago
      I just go with the * around the text since it seems to work fine for mobile.
    • nothrabannosir 9y ago
      You’re better off wrapping it in asterisks and prefixing it with a >: > No, Mr. Bond. I expect you to die.
    • masklinn 9y ago
      > It's not markdown, and the only thing we have is a code block. And shitty unescapable emphasis which fucks up as often as it succeeds.
    • Cthulhu_ 9y ago
      HN really needs some basic features to improve quality of life (and comments). Like making links, quotes, bullet lists, and code.
      • fredley 9y ago
        In short, it needs markdown
    • sp332 9y ago
      The username is @dang
    • mixmastamyk 9y ago
      One problem that makes it much worse is that the css for the code block has a very small max-width, if you disable it, much easier to read.
  • tzs 9y ago
    What I've sometimes done when I've needed a second level quote, or needed to both quote the parent comment and something else, is use a code block but word wrap it at some length hopefully not too wide for mobile. Here is an example using blocks wrapped to 40. How is this on mobile? >This is a top level quote second level quote something about the quick brown fox jumped over the lazy poodle third level quote the fox was Scottish and wearing a kilt, and nothing else. fourth level quote when he jumped over the poodle she saw his junk and complined to HR fifth level the fox got in trouble for harassement, and the poodle got in trouble for cultural insensitivity to Scots sixth level also the company got in trouble with OSHA for putting the poodle's workstation in a place where others had to jump over her to get in and out of the building
    • veidr 9y ago
      Sadly, this is what that looks like on a phone (iPhone, in this case): https://www.dropbox.com/s/xw30t56w06xpbgp/hn.png?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/xw30t56w06xpbgp/hn.png?dl=0
• c12 9y ago
  I honestly think changes should be made to employment law that invalidate sections of an employee contract that contravene or reduce the employee protections written in law. You shouldn't be able to sign a contract that waives your right to sue your employer if they discriminate against you.
  • zekevermillion 9y ago
    Some types of claims are not waivable by law. But I'm not sure discrimination should be one of them. Your proposal would have the effect of making it impossible to settle such claims in exchange for severance payments on termination of employment. This would only be helpful to employees who naively sign a separation agreement without understanding what they have given away. Perhaps a more nuanced approach could work, eg, the one taken by OWBPA to impose a mandatory post-signing period in which an older worker can revoke their signature. This is currently the law for "older workers" but I see no reason not to extend to all workers...
    • deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    • fulafel 9y ago
      In places where you can't waive this, people still get remuneration from the court. Of course these places have more reasonable lawyering costs too (and/or are bankrolled by the union).
    • wpietri 9y ago
      I'm not sure the settling of claims on termination is a particularly great mechanism as it stands. At least among friends, that seems to be a common clause when somebody gets laid off or let go. E.g., I know somebody who was laid off from a large tech company with no notice, and any severance was made conditional on signing away all rights. In effect, the ability to sign away those rights generally, rather than in response to settling a specific incident of wrongdoing, gives employers terminating a employees an incentive to fuck them over so as to maximize leverage. Perhaps better is something where anybody signing away the right to sue over discrimination has to do it under the supervision of the state's workplace anti-discrimination regulator? That would remove the information asymmetry that the employer has here.
• ggm 9y ago
  I admit naievity, but I didn't think contract law could waive things this fundamental. It feels like somebody drove contract law to a very strange place. Can we sign away rights to fundamental freedoms and become slaves?
  • Analemma_ 9y ago
    > I admit naievity, but I didn't think contract law could waive things this fundamental. In civilized countries, it can't: binding arbitration is unenforceable in Canada, Europe, Japan, etc. This is purely an American problem.
    • tzs 9y ago
      It took a couple of minutes with Google and the phrase "binding arbitration in $X" for $X in {Canada, Japan, France} to determine that this is not accurate. Are you sure you aren't mixing up binding arbitration with something else? Edit: it sounded like you were talking about arbitration in a more general context than just employment contracts. If you are just talking about employment contracts than you are probably right (except possible for Canada, where there seems to be case law going both ways, so it seems to depend on the particulars of what is in dispute and how the contract is written).
      • toyg 9y ago
        Uhm, are you sure? https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/events/labor_law/2012/05/international_labor_employment_law_committee_midyear_meeting/mw2012int_arbitration_tarasew.authcheckdam.pdf https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/events/labor_law... "In France, as a general rule, arbitration concerning individual employment contracts is prohibited. This holds true even in cases where the parties have included an arbitration agreement and a valid choice of law clause designating that foreign law applies to the entirety of the employment contract. Such a strict interpretation is seen as a public policy measure intended to protect employees who are considered to be in a necessarily weaker bargaining position compared to their employers. By giving Labor Courts the unique competency to adjudicate such matters, France can effectively safeguard its workforce. Similar interests motivate protective regulatory schemes in most European Union (EU) nations where, as we will discuss, the prevalence of arbitration in labor and employment disputes remains limited and political weariness towards the practice pervades. "
• logfromblammo 9y ago
  It wouldn't be so bad (for us) if a union could force the company to use their arbitrators. But honestly, it would be better for everyone all around if the labor laws were stronger and meaningfully enforceable--in an actual civil court. We deserve better, people. Richie McJobsCreator isn't going to just give away money for better working conditions at his company to a bunch of whiny nerds and unfashionable geezers. That could have otherwise gone straight into the owners' pockets, to... er... create more jobs! If we can't get the 22-year old naïfs to join up with the 40+ greyhairs, they're also going to work 18 years and then receive discriminatory firings and have trouble with rehiring only halfway to their retirement age. Did you want to have kids and help pay for their tuition? How will you feel when you get fired for being too old, just as your kids are taking their entrance exams? Wake up. Consider unions, or figure out how to pressure your politicians. Definitely think twice about working for a company that has no older employees. If you wait until you get your pink slip, and I have already been unemployable due to excessive experience for a decade or more, I won't be much help to you. I'll also feel obligated to say "told you so" every time you drop spare change in my cup.
  • brooklyn_ashey 9y ago
    I'm glad the good people at Pro Publica thought this was such an important issue and made that enormous effort to pull together actual data. That is an example of reporters doing their jobs. Over the past couple years on HN, it has been a rough slog to get this issue acknowledged by a lot of people. I've seen comments that would raise this issue aggressively downvoted, or at least pushed back against, hard. I'm not sure what it is exactly--- perhaps we as Americans desperately need to believe in meritocracy-- it is almost spiritual how much we seem to need that as a community. In fact, we are so in love with the idea that job awards, promotions, and continued employment in tech are meritocratic, we will just ignore data to "clap harder" in an attempt to make it so. So, now here is the data, thank goodness. No one can really say it is anecdotal any longer. And logfromblammo is correct- we all need to come together on this one. The labor laws respond to collective action-- that is how we got many of them in the first place. If we really need meritocracy so badly (and I think we do need to find a way to reward skill more accurately, or people get demoralized and that leads to even bigger problems, as it is right now...) we need to push hard for 1. actually blind interview practices (there is so much proof that this works to include marginalized groups- take a look at the screened auditions in major orchestras) 2. removing the ability of companies to "legislate" away labor protections from their employment contracts. 3. figure out how to act as a collective force to protect fair labor laws. Since we are a community of people who deftly wield software, I don't see that collective action should be much of a problem here. Ideas like the collecting of data (Pro Publica) and The Pursuance Project (Barrett Brown's organizing and collective action tool) could provide an idea of the way forward. But logfromblammo is right: we all need to wake up! first.
• fancyfacebook 9y ago
  In 20 years we're all going to be laughing at how barbaric and abusive all these forced arbitration clauses were.
• Joeri 9y ago
  What's especially clever here is that most people will sign to get the severance package (it's better than nothing), leaving the group who refuses to sign too small to mount an effective legal defense against age discrimination (the company can just outspend them in court). Meanwhile the company can just say "we offered people a choice, and they chose" and pretend like they did nothing wrong. This is exactly the sort of thing unions are supposed to protect people from. If something like this happened in my country there would be a general strike and the country would be at a standstill.
  • vog 9y ago
    > If something like this happened in my country there would be a general strike and the country would be at a standstill. That sounds too good, and too progressive, to be true. Which country do you live in?
    • Joeri 9y ago
      Belgium. We have a lot of strikes. To clarify: by something like this I meant legislation that allows behavior like this to be legal. A single company acting badly would lead to a local strike, probably not a general strike (those are for forcing government policy changes).
      • johndubchak 9y ago
        It's well understood that the trend is toward stripping employee's of their rights in favor of large Corporations. This, IMO, seems to have coincided with the Citizens United decision. Since that time Corporations have had many favorable outcomes from both parties.
        • neves 9y ago
          Non American here. What is Citizens United decision and why it is important?
          • 9y ago
• cgb223 9y ago
  How enforceable is something like that?
• duxup 9y ago
  In some form or another access to the courts is supposed to be a right... and yet it isn't in many cases. I can't get phone or internet access at my home through any of the providers without an arbitration agreement of some kind. It stops being an optional legal agreement when you have no choice....