56 ms·

> No, they pay you to go home at the end of the day. That's part of your contract. Does your contract actually say this explicitly? Mine doesn't and I'm not su

by cyphar 6y ago

> No, they pay you to go home at the end of the day. That's part of your contract. Does your contract actually say this explicitly? Mine doesn't and I'm not sure it'd even be enforceable if it did. > If you instead go to another job at the end of your eight hours, they'll fire you. You are aware that there is a fairly large number of people who work multiple jobs, right? And that they usually don't ask permission to do so? Now, it is true that this isn't common in software development jobs, but employment contracts for software development jobs aren't magic -- they're pretty much the same as any other employment contract. (It's also probably not legal to fire someone for working a second job, at least here in Australia.) I am also floored that someone actually thinks that their job is something they're paid to do 24/7.

p_l 6y ago
I think it's the inherent weirdness of what USA considers "salaried" job - it seems to me that you essentially don't have set hours, your pay isn't related to the hours you put in, and any overtime gets waived in programming by the overtime exempt rule. If this sounds to you like shit sandwich, that's because it is one, even if some people manage to make it work with less hours than norm.
joshuamorton 6y ago
> Does your contract actually say this explicitly? Mine doesn't and I'm not sure it'd even be enforceable if it did. moonlighting clauses are fairly standard and I'd be surprised if your contract doesn't include one. > You are aware that there is a fairly large number of people who work multiple jobs, right? And that they usually don't ask permission to do so? Yes, people violate their employment contracts. > (It's also probably not legal to fire someone for working a second job, at least here in Australia.) The enforceability of moonlight contracts may vary. For example working at a software company and moonlighting as a barista is less likely to be enforceable than working at a software company and moonlighting at another (or moonlighting as a freelance developer), at least in the US, the second is probably a violation. Not that this matters in the US since you're usually at will anyway.
geofft 6y ago
I am prohibited by my employment contract from working a second job without approval. It doesn't say, of course, that I'm supposed to go home. I can go to the bar, the library, the bowling alley, whatever. But it does say that I can't hold a second paid job (and it does demand that I truthfully tell them where I live). I am very much being paid not to work a second job. Maybe you aren't! But I am, this is fairly normal for salaried positions in America, it's almost certainly enforceable, and it's something I willingly signed and accepted when I took this job. I am aware there are a large number of people working non-salaried jobs who work multiple jobs. This thread is specifically about salaried jobs. More relevantly to the thread, my contract also says that any work I do which is related to my employer's actual business is owned by my employer, whether or not I do it on work time or at work. I paid actual lawyers to review that portion of the contract before I signed it, and they told me it is absolutely enforceable. In this case, the question is whether an IBM employee can hack on an IBM-authored, IBM-maintained driver for IBM computers, contributing to which used to be part of their job on the side. It would be absolutely defensible for IBM to say they own this work regardless of when it happens, and it would be frankly surprising if the employment contract did not say that.

by cyphar 6y ago

p_l 6y ago

I think it's the inherent weirdness of what USA considers "salaried" job - it seems to me that you essentially don't have set hours, your pay isn't related to the hours you put in, and any overtime gets waived in programming by the overtime exempt rule. If this sounds to you like shit sandwich, that's because it is one, even if some people manage to make it work with less hours than norm.

joshuamorton 6y ago

> Does your contract actually say this explicitly? Mine doesn't and I'm not sure it'd even be enforceable if it did. moonlighting clauses are fairly standard and I'd be surprised if your contract doesn't include one. > You are aware that there is a fairly large number of people who work multiple jobs, right? And that they usually don't ask permission to do so? Yes, people violate their employment contracts. > (It's also probably not legal to fire someone for working a second job, at least here in Australia.) The enforceability of moonlight contracts may vary. For example working at a software company and moonlighting as a barista is less likely to be enforceable than working at a software company and moonlighting at another (or moonlighting as a freelance developer), at least in the US, the second is probably a violation. Not that this matters in the US since you're usually at will anyway.

geofft 6y ago

I am prohibited by my employment contract from working a second job without approval. It doesn't say, of course, that I'm supposed to go home. I can go to the bar, the library, the bowling alley, whatever. But it does say that I can't hold a second paid job (and it does demand that I truthfully tell them where I live). I am very much being paid not to work a second job. Maybe you aren't! But I am, this is fairly normal for salaried positions in America, it's almost certainly enforceable, and it's something I willingly signed and accepted when I took this job. I am aware there are a large number of people working non-salaried jobs who work multiple jobs. This thread is specifically about salaried jobs. More relevantly to the thread, my contract also says that any work I do which is related to my employer's actual business is owned by my employer, whether or not I do it on work time or at work. I paid actual lawyers to review that portion of the contract before I signed it, and they told me it is absolutely enforceable. In this case, the question is whether an IBM employee can hack on an IBM-authored, IBM-maintained driver for IBM computers, contributing to which used to be part of their job on the side. It would be absolutely defensible for IBM to say they own this work regardless of when it happens, and it would be frankly surprising if the employment contract did not say that.