4 ms·
I never understand this point personally. If you're delivering value to the multiple companies you work for such that they like you, or at least don't fire you,
by cercatrova 6y ago
I never understand this point personally. If you're delivering value to the multiple companies you work for such that they like you, or at least don't fire you, then I don't see anything immoral in that. It's merely corporations who insist on people working for one and only one company at a time when in reality it shouldn't matter.
- seniorivn 6y agothere is a chance you are going to have access to valuable information of competing companies, that would put you in position of power over them, and is a clear conflict of interests. So it's like a lawyer serving opposing parties in court, nobody's asking why it's impossible
- amw 6y agoThat's only true in that particular hypothetical. There are a lot of possible circumstances without such a clear conflict of interest. Also, in the lawyer example, someone's freedom or livelihood is on the line. In the company example, it's a company's profits, which has a much less clear relationship to either of those two things, especially in today's world of 250:1 salary ratios.
- confidantlake 6y agoCompletely agree. Do we insist that corporations only sell to a single customer? No that would be absurd. But insisting a person can only sell their labor to a single customer is seen as perfectly normal.