5 ms·

Am employee is not a slave. You owe your employer the work for which they have hired you, and no more. These kinds of employee agreements should be illegal; w

by mckoss 5y ago

Am employee is not a slave. You owe your employer the work for which they have hired you, and no more. These kinds of employee agreements should be illegal; what I do with my own time and resources is none of my employer's business.

slownews45 5y ago
Edit: Removed
thisisnico 5y ago
I couldn't agree more.
katrotz 5y ago
Unless it impacts your performance during working hours
- TheCapn 5y ago
  I'd say you have to be more specific on that. I broke my leg once playing paintball, my personal time hobbies impacted my performance during work hours for a couple months due to mobility issues + appointment followups. Is it in my employer's purview to tell me I can't play sports?
  - Jolter 5y ago
    Sometimes. A previous employer of mine fired a colleague for breaking his leg in a football game. Well, actually, they fired him for calling in sick with a supposed fever and going off to play football. The broken leg was just a smoking gun.
  - samatman 5y ago
    Under some circumstances, yes, under most, no. Actors will sometimes have clauses which prevent them from doing dangerous stuff they like to do (skiing, race car driving) while they're shooting a film. An actor becoming unavailable is very expensive. For any given worker, losing their contribution costs more than just their share. There's always a certain amount of working around the gap in the roster. But that's priced-in, if you will: people go on vacation, take sick leave, parental leave, and they quit outright. So I don't consider it ethical for employers to add that sort of clause under normal circumstances, as indeed, they don't tend to. I do consider it ethical in specific circumstances, however, such as the one I just described.
- kabdib 5y ago
  In the absence of a clear and direct conflict of interest (e.g., awarding contracts to vendors, making strategic decisions), what you do on your own time with your own resources shouldn't matter at all. I know games companies that let their employees work on games on the side, and publish them. It doesn't hurt the company, and the employees are happier.
- Closi 5y ago
  Unless it impacts your performance during working hours to an extent that you are not reasonably fulfilling your duties - “impacting your performance” is too vague.
- byset 5y ago
  “Unless it impacts your performance during working hours” — Shouldn’t the employer just note the poor performance and tell you to improve, rather than police your personal life? Under your reasoning, an employer could require a certain number of hours of sleep per night.
mimixco 5y ago
Would it be ok to work to develop a competing business and then quit to launch that business? That's unethical. There's an implied contract that when you work for someone you don't also work against them. In higher level jobs, the contract is written. Because Amazon sells video game software, if you decide to work for them, you should not be in the business of making or selling video game software. Your argument is a good one against letting companies like Amazon take over so many industries that they can shut everyone out!
- camgunz 5y ago
  If it's a direct competition, I can see how that makes sense. But your argument is essentially that no one can take side work. Salaried photographers can't work a wedding; illustrators can't help with a friend's book; SWEs can't write a script for a friend. There has to be a limit, and it seems like the limit that makes sense is: you did this on company time using company resources.
  - mimixco 5y ago
    No, the limit is does your business create or use intellectual property that is also a line of business of the company. This is how its actually handled in contracts with people who perform this kind of work. A photographer who works in commercial ad photos and shoots weddings on the side does not compete with his employer. If he did ad shots on the side, he would. If the illustrator publishes books and helps a friend with a book (for money) that isn't published by that company, you're in a grey area. If your friend is Microsoft and Apple pays you, no grey area.
    - camgunz 5y ago
      Well, isn't it all a grey area though? What if the photographer's ad company is Christian, and she shoots a gay wedding? What if the SWE's work at Apple is on a product Microsoft doesn't compete with? What if the illustrator's friend's book is so low-circulation their company wouldn't illustrate it? What if the friend owed the illustrator a favor and wanted to give them some exposure, and would never have contracted the illustrator's company? I mean, either we're talking "might makes right" and your employer just bulldozes you with "our army of lawyers defines what the grey area is", or the line is "you can't use our resources for your personal gain". I think those are really the only two options here.
gorwell 5y ago
People should stop agreeing to these. You already went through the interview process, already given an offer. Companies aren't going to rescind the offer because you strike out this line from the employment contract. Just like you negotiate salary, you negotiate the agreement, striking out that part in the contract.
- MauranKilom 5y ago
  > Companies aren't going to rescind the offer because you strike out this line from the employment contract. ...except in this case that's exactly what happened? Legal was asked to waive the policy and they refused.
  - MrStonedOne 5y ago
    You don't ask legal to wave the policy, you remove the offending terms and hand back the revised version of the contract.
    - Spoom 5y ago
      That's usually not how it works with employment contracts, especially at big software companies. I'm fairly certain this was given to the candidate using something like Digisign, which can be configured to not allow revisions from the signer.
    - selfhoster11 5y ago
      Not once did I have an opportunity to do that. DocuSign and its ilk take care of that.
- Arcanum-XIII 5y ago
  They will rescind the offer. Most of the time, negotiating contract is way more difficult than salary.
rurban 5y ago
You don't understand American cooperatism then. The worker is still your legal slave, with all cooperate rights and contracts trumping civil and person rights. Formerly called fascism, which is just an an extension of the old aristocracy brought over into the industrial pseudo-democratic age. Also called the "American freedom". You are free to sign this contract. Or not

by mckoss 5y ago

slownews45 5y ago

Edit: Removed

thisisnico 5y ago

I couldn't agree more.

katrotz 5y ago

Unless it impacts your performance during working hours

TheCapn 5y ago
I'd say you have to be more specific on that. I broke my leg once playing paintball, my personal time hobbies impacted my performance during work hours for a couple months due to mobility issues + appointment followups. Is it in my employer's purview to tell me I can't play sports?
- Jolter 5y ago
  Sometimes. A previous employer of mine fired a colleague for breaking his leg in a football game. Well, actually, they fired him for calling in sick with a supposed fever and going off to play football. The broken leg was just a smoking gun.
- samatman 5y ago
  Under some circumstances, yes, under most, no. Actors will sometimes have clauses which prevent them from doing dangerous stuff they like to do (skiing, race car driving) while they're shooting a film. An actor becoming unavailable is very expensive. For any given worker, losing their contribution costs more than just their share. There's always a certain amount of working around the gap in the roster. But that's priced-in, if you will: people go on vacation, take sick leave, parental leave, and they quit outright. So I don't consider it ethical for employers to add that sort of clause under normal circumstances, as indeed, they don't tend to. I do consider it ethical in specific circumstances, however, such as the one I just described.
kabdib 5y ago
In the absence of a clear and direct conflict of interest (e.g., awarding contracts to vendors, making strategic decisions), what you do on your own time with your own resources shouldn't matter at all. I know games companies that let their employees work on games on the side, and publish them. It doesn't hurt the company, and the employees are happier.
Closi 5y ago
Unless it impacts your performance during working hours to an extent that you are not reasonably fulfilling your duties - “impacting your performance” is too vague.
byset 5y ago
“Unless it impacts your performance during working hours” — Shouldn’t the employer just note the poor performance and tell you to improve, rather than police your personal life? Under your reasoning, an employer could require a certain number of hours of sleep per night.

mimixco 5y ago

Would it be ok to work to develop a competing business and then quit to launch that business? That's unethical. There's an implied contract that when you work for someone you don't also work against them. In higher level jobs, the contract is written. Because Amazon sells video game software, if you decide to work for them, you should not be in the business of making or selling video game software. Your argument is a good one against letting companies like Amazon take over so many industries that they can shut everyone out!

camgunz 5y ago
If it's a direct competition, I can see how that makes sense. But your argument is essentially that no one can take side work. Salaried photographers can't work a wedding; illustrators can't help with a friend's book; SWEs can't write a script for a friend. There has to be a limit, and it seems like the limit that makes sense is: you did this on company time using company resources.
- mimixco 5y ago
  No, the limit is does your business create or use intellectual property that is also a line of business of the company. This is how its actually handled in contracts with people who perform this kind of work. A photographer who works in commercial ad photos and shoots weddings on the side does not compete with his employer. If he did ad shots on the side, he would. If the illustrator publishes books and helps a friend with a book (for money) that isn't published by that company, you're in a grey area. If your friend is Microsoft and Apple pays you, no grey area.
  - camgunz 5y ago
    Well, isn't it all a grey area though? What if the photographer's ad company is Christian, and she shoots a gay wedding? What if the SWE's work at Apple is on a product Microsoft doesn't compete with? What if the illustrator's friend's book is so low-circulation their company wouldn't illustrate it? What if the friend owed the illustrator a favor and wanted to give them some exposure, and would never have contracted the illustrator's company? I mean, either we're talking "might makes right" and your employer just bulldozes you with "our army of lawyers defines what the grey area is", or the line is "you can't use our resources for your personal gain". I think those are really the only two options here.

gorwell 5y ago

People should stop agreeing to these. You already went through the interview process, already given an offer. Companies aren't going to rescind the offer because you strike out this line from the employment contract. Just like you negotiate salary, you negotiate the agreement, striking out that part in the contract.

MauranKilom 5y ago
> Companies aren't going to rescind the offer because you strike out this line from the employment contract. ...except in this case that's exactly what happened? Legal was asked to waive the policy and they refused.
- MrStonedOne 5y ago
  You don't ask legal to wave the policy, you remove the offending terms and hand back the revised version of the contract.
  - Spoom 5y ago
    That's usually not how it works with employment contracts, especially at big software companies. I'm fairly certain this was given to the candidate using something like Digisign, which can be configured to not allow revisions from the signer.
  - selfhoster11 5y ago
    Not once did I have an opportunity to do that. DocuSign and its ilk take care of that.
Arcanum-XIII 5y ago
They will rescind the offer. Most of the time, negotiating contract is way more difficult than salary.

rurban 5y ago

You don't understand American cooperatism then. The worker is still your legal slave, with all cooperate rights and contracts trumping civil and person rights. Formerly called fascism, which is just an an extension of the old aristocracy brought over into the industrial pseudo-democratic age. Also called the "American freedom". You are free to sign this contract. Or not