9 ms·
kinda funny how you are always suppposed to wait for the "signed offer" before relocating, notifying your current job etc, but the signed offer in reality is ju
by grillvogel 5y ago
kinda funny how you are always suppposed to wait for the "signed offer" before relocating, notifying your current job etc, but the signed offer in reality is just as worthless as the verbal offer.
- paxys 5y agoNot quite, since you can always claim damages (e.g. relocation costs, breaking a lease) if the company rescinds a signed offer.
- grillvogel 5y agodoes that actually hold up in "at will" states?
- rmk 5y agoWhy not? You are not asking to be reinstated or hired, but only for reasonable costs arising out of a verbal offer of employment to be recovered.
- Digory 5y agoNormally it does, but seldom are the stakes high enough to sue. The concept is called "detrimental reliance." But it looks like she was already unemployed and the job was remote (so she didn't have to move). If it was at-will, and she hadn't done any work yet, there's probably not much there. Online embarassment is hard to value, unfortunately.
- jnwatson 5y agoYes. There's a legal concept called "promissory estoppel". Essentially, a promise is a promise, and if I act on your promise and you later break it, and I suffer economic losses because I assumed you wouldn't, you're liable. That still wouldn't cover the inconvenience of looking for a new job, but it is something.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]