8 ms·

I went to IBM(India) interview sometime in 2011, after leaving GlusterFS (Red Hat). Interview went well, during final call with management. I was asked to stop

by giis 8y ago

I went to IBM(India) interview sometime in 2011, after leaving GlusterFS (Red Hat). Interview went well, during final call with management. I was asked to stop working on Open Source during weekends or off-hours even though the IBM project and my Open Source work has nothing in common. I said, "I thought, IBM support Open Source right?" his response, "Yes, but that's another team" I decided to call-off the interview after that.

alexott 8y ago
The same is for Intel...
andy_ppp 8y ago
I can see Joel's points here and this is relevant to the discussion. It's probably the article he has written I disagree with the most as there is a simple way to deal with this; be very clear about the projects, code and designs the employee works on each month and sign them over as they are delivered. That way the employee's own work will be clear should there be any legal wrangling. This could be done by a status in Jira for example. https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2016/12/09/developers-side-projects/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2016/12/09/developers-side-pr...
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
kitd 8y ago
I'm an IBMer and the current rule is you can work on OS projects in your own time as long as it isn't to the detriment of IBM's projects.
- jsiepkes 8y ago
  IBM has such a large portfolio that you are probably hard pressed finding an OSS project that doesn't compete with an IBM solution.
- ndru 8y ago
  Funnily enough, one of the most praised points in Red Hat's code of conduct is the fact that it specifically says that you can work on open source projects _even if it is to the detriment to Red Hat_. Guess that's going to change now. Disclaimer: Red Hat employee (at the moment)
  - ddri 8y ago
    That's a great example. I remember a lengthy thread about this on memo-list back when I was at Red Hat. Always made me smile. It's also how we were able to spin out our company and raise VC on something inspired by experience, if not using the same code, as what we worked on internally. Having one of the Red Hat founders as our investor helped, but I just loved this attitude of "go build something awesome and keep in touch". I hope your transition goes well!
  - oso2k 8y ago
    (Also a Red Hatter) So...not completely true. There was that one memo-list thread last year where someone complained loudly that they were not allowed to work on an intentionally competing solution and repo, even if it was on their own time.
    - cpitman 8y ago
      He was certainly allowed to work on it on his own time. He just was no longer being paid by Red Hat to work on it, or to travel to conferences/conventions to work on it.
  - GDV 8y ago
    Hey ndru, I'm a reporter with Bloomberg and I'm keen to stay in touch with Red Hat employees to get an accurate picture of how the acquisition is going. Can keep it completely anonymous. gerritdevynck@protonmail.com if you're interested. Thanks!
- LoSboccacc 8y ago
  As IBMer you should know there are a plurality of local IBM all over the world, each with local laws and regulations to abide. In Italy all work produced off hours as subordinate is intellectual property of the employer by default unless you sign off a release form for each of them. In Ireland at least they don't want you to touch third party open source code without license vetting because it could inspire you subconsciously and result in copyright infringement.
  - chasd00 8y ago
    This is some of the craziest stuff i've ever read. I must be naive, i've worked a couple big firms but have never seen employment terms like these.
  - consp 8y ago
    These terms would be illegal in the Netherlands as the company cannot infringe on personal time. > In Italy all work produced off hours as subordinate is intellectual property of the employer by default unless you sign off a release form for each of them. I'm pretty sure that will not hold up in court if you go high enough (e.g. European) as it would impede self determination.
SpaceInvader 8y ago
I am currently working for IBM and I'm tied. I had to supress my commercial project once I joined big blue. What I have in contract is - if you want to open a company, you need IBM's permission first. And it's just frustrating as they try to block it for as long as possibe even if you're not doing IT in your private little business.
- aedron 8y ago
  A long time ago I joined IBM via an acquistion of the company I worked for. One part of the (lengthy) contract I had to sign, was a form listing any side projects I may have that I would be required to no longer work on. I simply omitted that page when I returned the contract and no one ever noticed.
  - JohannesH 8y ago
    I'm curious. Anyone care to outline the legal ramifications of this action? What would happen if IBM tried to stop his side-project? 1. Would IBM be able to enforce the original contract as it was outlined when they sent it to him? Would he be liable to fraud or other similar charges (for instance if he altered the contract after IBM representative added their signature)? 2. Or would the altered contract stand up in court?
    - Leace 8y ago
      This reminds me of that extreme example of altering the contract: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/creditcards/10231556/Man-who-created-own-credit-card-sues-bank-for-not-sticking-to-terms.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowin...
      - JohannesH 8y ago
        Very interesting read. However, he changed it before the bank added their signarture. I imagine that if you change the contract after a signature is added by one party, and then add your own signarture, that would surely be fraud... right?
netcraft 8y ago
(OT) I interviewed with IBM after they were acquiring my companies resources at the time. My first two interviews went swimmingly. On my third the interviewer had marked through my last name on my resume and when I asked about it she said she assumed I had spelled it wrong. That was the best thing that happened in the interview.
- irrational 8y ago
  She assumed you misspelled your own last name? That's so bizarre.
  - netcraft 8y ago
    Years later I had a thought that she was trying to throw me off and see how I reacted under pressure maybe - but bizarre is a great way to put it. She took everything I said out of context.
balabaster 8y ago
People are aware that they're not required to sign any contract they're not happy with, right? You are well within your rights to cross through any section of a contract or amend it until you're happy with it. I've routinely done this with every contract I've ever signed. Nothing gets signed without legal scrutiny on my part and it never will; and I've quite literally never had a potential client or employer balk at this. All of them have agreed that my amendments have been quite reasonable - and that includes scrubbing through any sections that prevent me from working for other clients or writing my own projects, commercial or otherwise. Ensuring a contract is fair and equitable is part of doing business. There is nothing wrong with this. When you work for a company, you are still an autonomous person with your own agency. Any company that seeks to deny that agency don't deserve your employ. Any reasonable and honourable company expects you to review contracts and amend them. You shouldn't feel bad about doing this. Nor should you feel coerced by the fact that they have given you a one sided contract. Make it equitable. I don't care if you're IBM, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook or God almighty, himself. If you choose to attempt to quell my agency, our relationship is done. I will not be denied my agency and neither should anyone else. Those companies that over-reach in a bid to control their employees are unscrupulous. This is the same kind of toxic behaviour that people seek to avoid in their relationships, yet somehow they're quite willing to live their life working in relationships like this... I don't understand the double standard. I've heard soooooo many people say that "contracts are just standard paper and if I rock the boat I won't get the job." Don't be bullied into signing a contract because you feel like you don't have any other option. Contracts are not "standard paper," they are legally binding documents that seek to limit your behaviour. Don't let any employer reach outside their jurisdiction and into your personal life. Ever.
- 0xffff2 8y ago
  >People are aware that they're not required to sign any contract they're not happy with, right? You are well within your rights to cross through any section of a contract or amend it until you're happy with it. How do people do this these days? Virtually everything I sign these days from my employment contract to my lease to the vast majority of the paperwork for my mortgage was all signed electronically. There's no apparent mechanism for redlining sections when e-signing.
SuperSandro2000 8y ago
I would have done the same.
MyNameIsFred 8y ago
What wouldn't be the 5th time I've heard such stories, but I don't think it's in any way specific to IBM. Employers like that want any OT you do to be dedicated to THEIR endeavor, not somebody else's...even your own. If you're able and willing to code in your off-time, you should be doing it for the good of the Company. /s
- scoot_718 8y ago
  If they want that sort of dedication they can give me equity or back off.
- mcv 8y ago
  It's a terrible and completely unreasonable stance for an employer. You get the hours you pay for. You don't get to own people's free time.
  - brazzy 8y ago
    One relatively benign reason behind such policies is that the employer wants your free time to actually be free time that helps your recover, not a second job that leaves you exhausted and fighting burnout and sleep deprivation.
    - CleanShirt 8y ago
      That doesnt stand up to reason. There was no enquiry into the amount of hours put into this that would indiciate it was second job or exhausting, they also don't do a full enquiry into any other activities outside your work that might exaust you. That would make contributing to open source a totally arbitrary thing to pick on, which of course it isn't.
    - esotericn 8y ago
      This happens because the "first job" doesn't pay enough (so doesn't allow for long-term free time), or has hours that are too long to begin with (so doesn't allow for short-term free time).
    - 8y ago

by giis 8y ago

alexott 8y ago

The same is for Intel...

andy_ppp 8y ago

I can see Joel's points here and this is relevant to the discussion. It's probably the article he has written I disagree with the most as there is a simple way to deal with this; be very clear about the projects, code and designs the employee works on each month and sign them over as they are delivered. That way the employee's own work will be clear should there be any legal wrangling. This could be done by a status in Jira for example. https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2016/12/09/developers-side-projects/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2016/12/09/developers-side-pr...

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

kitd 8y ago

I'm an IBMer and the current rule is you can work on OS projects in your own time as long as it isn't to the detriment of IBM's projects.

jsiepkes 8y ago
IBM has such a large portfolio that you are probably hard pressed finding an OSS project that doesn't compete with an IBM solution.
ndru 8y ago
Funnily enough, one of the most praised points in Red Hat's code of conduct is the fact that it specifically says that you can work on open source projects _even if it is to the detriment to Red Hat_. Guess that's going to change now. Disclaimer: Red Hat employee (at the moment)
- ddri 8y ago
  That's a great example. I remember a lengthy thread about this on memo-list back when I was at Red Hat. Always made me smile. It's also how we were able to spin out our company and raise VC on something inspired by experience, if not using the same code, as what we worked on internally. Having one of the Red Hat founders as our investor helped, but I just loved this attitude of "go build something awesome and keep in touch". I hope your transition goes well!
- oso2k 8y ago
  (Also a Red Hatter) So...not completely true. There was that one memo-list thread last year where someone complained loudly that they were not allowed to work on an intentionally competing solution and repo, even if it was on their own time.
  - cpitman 8y ago
    He was certainly allowed to work on it on his own time. He just was no longer being paid by Red Hat to work on it, or to travel to conferences/conventions to work on it.
- GDV 8y ago
  Hey ndru, I'm a reporter with Bloomberg and I'm keen to stay in touch with Red Hat employees to get an accurate picture of how the acquisition is going. Can keep it completely anonymous. gerritdevynck@protonmail.com if you're interested. Thanks!
LoSboccacc 8y ago
As IBMer you should know there are a plurality of local IBM all over the world, each with local laws and regulations to abide. In Italy all work produced off hours as subordinate is intellectual property of the employer by default unless you sign off a release form for each of them. In Ireland at least they don't want you to touch third party open source code without license vetting because it could inspire you subconsciously and result in copyright infringement.
- chasd00 8y ago
  This is some of the craziest stuff i've ever read. I must be naive, i've worked a couple big firms but have never seen employment terms like these.
- consp 8y ago
  These terms would be illegal in the Netherlands as the company cannot infringe on personal time. > In Italy all work produced off hours as subordinate is intellectual property of the employer by default unless you sign off a release form for each of them. I'm pretty sure that will not hold up in court if you go high enough (e.g. European) as it would impede self determination.

SpaceInvader 8y ago

I am currently working for IBM and I'm tied. I had to supress my commercial project once I joined big blue. What I have in contract is - if you want to open a company, you need IBM's permission first. And it's just frustrating as they try to block it for as long as possibe even if you're not doing IT in your private little business.

aedron 8y ago
A long time ago I joined IBM via an acquistion of the company I worked for. One part of the (lengthy) contract I had to sign, was a form listing any side projects I may have that I would be required to no longer work on. I simply omitted that page when I returned the contract and no one ever noticed.
- JohannesH 8y ago
  I'm curious. Anyone care to outline the legal ramifications of this action? What would happen if IBM tried to stop his side-project? 1. Would IBM be able to enforce the original contract as it was outlined when they sent it to him? Would he be liable to fraud or other similar charges (for instance if he altered the contract after IBM representative added their signature)? 2. Or would the altered contract stand up in court?
  - Leace 8y ago
    This reminds me of that extreme example of altering the contract: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/creditcards/10231556/Man-who-created-own-credit-card-sues-bank-for-not-sticking-to-terms.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowin...
    - JohannesH 8y ago
      Very interesting read. However, he changed it before the bank added their signarture. I imagine that if you change the contract after a signature is added by one party, and then add your own signarture, that would surely be fraud... right?

netcraft 8y ago

(OT) I interviewed with IBM after they were acquiring my companies resources at the time. My first two interviews went swimmingly. On my third the interviewer had marked through my last name on my resume and when I asked about it she said she assumed I had spelled it wrong. That was the best thing that happened in the interview.

irrational 8y ago
She assumed you misspelled your own last name? That's so bizarre.
- netcraft 8y ago
  Years later I had a thought that she was trying to throw me off and see how I reacted under pressure maybe - but bizarre is a great way to put it. She took everything I said out of context.

balabaster 8y ago

People are aware that they're not required to sign any contract they're not happy with, right? You are well within your rights to cross through any section of a contract or amend it until you're happy with it. I've routinely done this with every contract I've ever signed. Nothing gets signed without legal scrutiny on my part and it never will; and I've quite literally never had a potential client or employer balk at this. All of them have agreed that my amendments have been quite reasonable - and that includes scrubbing through any sections that prevent me from working for other clients or writing my own projects, commercial or otherwise. Ensuring a contract is fair and equitable is part of doing business. There is nothing wrong with this. When you work for a company, you are still an autonomous person with your own agency. Any company that seeks to deny that agency don't deserve your employ. Any reasonable and honourable company expects you to review contracts and amend them. You shouldn't feel bad about doing this. Nor should you feel coerced by the fact that they have given you a one sided contract. Make it equitable. I don't care if you're IBM, Microsoft, Apple, Facebook or God almighty, himself. If you choose to attempt to quell my agency, our relationship is done. I will not be denied my agency and neither should anyone else. Those companies that over-reach in a bid to control their employees are unscrupulous. This is the same kind of toxic behaviour that people seek to avoid in their relationships, yet somehow they're quite willing to live their life working in relationships like this... I don't understand the double standard. I've heard soooooo many people say that "contracts are just standard paper and if I rock the boat I won't get the job." Don't be bullied into signing a contract because you feel like you don't have any other option. Contracts are not "standard paper," they are legally binding documents that seek to limit your behaviour. Don't let any employer reach outside their jurisdiction and into your personal life. Ever.

0xffff2 8y ago
>People are aware that they're not required to sign any contract they're not happy with, right? You are well within your rights to cross through any section of a contract or amend it until you're happy with it. How do people do this these days? Virtually everything I sign these days from my employment contract to my lease to the vast majority of the paperwork for my mortgage was all signed electronically. There's no apparent mechanism for redlining sections when e-signing.

SuperSandro2000 8y ago

I would have done the same.

MyNameIsFred 8y ago

What wouldn't be the 5th time I've heard such stories, but I don't think it's in any way specific to IBM. Employers like that want any OT you do to be dedicated to THEIR endeavor, not somebody else's...even your own. If you're able and willing to code in your off-time, you should be doing it for the good of the Company. /s

scoot_718 8y ago
If they want that sort of dedication they can give me equity or back off.
mcv 8y ago
It's a terrible and completely unreasonable stance for an employer. You get the hours you pay for. You don't get to own people's free time.
- brazzy 8y ago
  One relatively benign reason behind such policies is that the employer wants your free time to actually be free time that helps your recover, not a second job that leaves you exhausted and fighting burnout and sleep deprivation.
  - CleanShirt 8y ago
    That doesnt stand up to reason. There was no enquiry into the amount of hours put into this that would indiciate it was second job or exhausting, they also don't do a full enquiry into any other activities outside your work that might exaust you. That would make contributing to open source a totally arbitrary thing to pick on, which of course it isn't.
  - esotericn 8y ago
    This happens because the "first job" doesn't pay enough (so doesn't allow for long-term free time), or has hours that are too long to begin with (so doesn't allow for short-term free time).
  - 8y ago