5 ms·

> Currently contracts seem to be nothing more than one-sided weapons that powerful companies use to get vulnerable people to do things that they otherwise would

• BonesJustice 8y ago
  Indeed. If there is no downside to stuffing contracts with every potentially useful clause they can think of, then why not do so? Perhaps the solution is to give workers the right to have employment-related contracts reviewed and negotiated by an attorney of their choosing at the employer’s expense. With actual costs attached, employers would suddenly have an incentive to keep their contracts as short and simple as possible, reserving the more onerous clauses for only the most senior positions. Contracts for most positions would need to be kept short, reasonable, and comprehensible such that candidates don’t feel the need to exercise their right to attorney review.
  • deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  • wool_gather 8y ago
    > Perhaps the solution is to give workers the right to have employment-related contracts reviewed and negotiated by an attorney of their choosing at the employer’s expense. This is one of the key reasons that unions are helpful to workers: each one of them doesn't have to go through this on their own. One expert does it for all of them.