6 ms·

> Employers are not pleased: Bell described it as a "new form of theft and deception, and not something in which an ethical, honest person would participate."

> Employers are not pleased: Bell described it as a "new form of theft and deception, and not something in which an ethical, honest person would participate." Hmm, I hold his opinion on the ethical aspects of doing it without being known, or lying about it when confronted thus turning it into dishonesty, but if it's within the bounds of the contract I'm not sure companies can realistically take the high ground on this. Us IC bottom feeders are 'cattle' to corporations; it seems some have decided to treat companies as 'fodder'.

Nekorosu 4y ago
Sounds like psychological manipulation and justification of questionable actions from the Tech CEO's side.
- latency-guy2 4y ago
  Is that what made these tech workers slack on their job? I'll be the first to tell my manager and HR about bad employees, especially the ones that drop the ball so frequently. It doesn't seem like I get any concessions for picking up their slack, so I make it a point to tell others that I am taking up their work and take credit. I don't wish for them to benefit from my benevolence, that's really just me getting stepped on by someone I thought I could rely on myself. If these 'workers' could get fired more often, I applaud this psychological manipulation from the Tech CEO.
  - Nekorosu 4y ago
    I don't remember any mentions of them slacking their job. Did I miss it?
javagram 4y ago
I highly doubt it’s in the bounds of the contract with any typical employer. I usually have to sign a clause assigning copyrights for anything work related to the employer, for instance. Working for two tech companies and signing both clauses validly would not be possible since each would require going through an internal process to give permission to contribute code outside the company. That said, if someone is working as an independent contractor being “over employed” would be fine as long as you aren’t double billing your time.
- ElevenLathe 4y ago
  > I highly doubt it’s in the bounds of the contract with any typical employer. Certainly not any recent contracts since this has popped up on corporate legal departments' radars.
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    What do you mean? I don't think ip assignments have gone away
    - ElevenLathe 4y ago
      My point was that, even if this was OK under most pre-pandemic contracts, you can be sure that savvy legal departments have since put in language that makes it definitely out-of-bounds now.
- saagarjha 4y ago
  Work on two unrelated things?
  - yitchelle 4y ago
    I always wondered how far some companies will go to enforce this. For example if my second job is as a professional actor in the local musical production, would all my creative IP and earnings belong to my main job? Maybe this example is too far remove from reality.
    - Tangurena2 4y ago
      It totally depends on the state you are a resident of. Or the state they sue you in. Some states hold IP arrangements to be toilet paper. Some will enforce even the most egregious ones. I am not a lawyer. It appears to me that being a contractor - rather than a salaried full-time-employee would be the route to go if you are interested in working more than one job. As a salaried FTE, the legal expectation is that you devote yourself 100% to your employer. In business law classes, this is referred to as the "principal agent problem". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal%E2%80%93agent_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal%E2%80%93agent_proble... Business-type people are going to use this viewpoint in order to perceive the situation. In India, there are some laws that basically say that you are required to put your main employer first and that it is effectively illegal for you to work more than one job - no matter how poorly that job pays you. This is one post from very long ago about "work for hire" and IP assignment agreements: https://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=153046 https://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=153046 Another case that I can't fully remember the names of (so no links or references) was of a software developer in Texas or Oklahoma who developed something on his own time. His employer wanted the IP and pursued him in court for almost 2 decades bankrupting him and getting him thrown into jail (for contempt of court) when he refused a court order to turn over the source code and documentation. How far will they go? Well, how much to they hate you? How much spite are they powered by? Narcissists and sociopaths will go to extreme lengths to destroy their "enemies". For a recent example, see ex-President Trump.
wahnfrieden 4y ago
Do you expect and get similarly full transparency on professional engagements from your execs and owners?
- ido 4y ago
  You're not your execs' and owners' employer.
  - wahnfrieden 4y ago
    That’s an obvious tautology
    - ido 4y ago
      I meant the relationship is not symmetrical so it's not such an obvious gatcha that the people at the other end of the relationship aren't expecting to divulge their professional engagements to you but ask for the reverse. Your boss also doesn't have to submit a request for taking time off to you either.
      - wahnfrieden 4y ago
        And why is it so asymmetrical? Why do you accept that? I’m trying to understand your point besides simple reactionism
        ido 4y ago
        Because most of us don't work in anarchist co-ops?
        snapplebobapple 4y ago
        I don't really get that impression reading the comments. Hacker news seems to be anarchist co-ops all the way down....
gspencley 4y ago
I do think that companies have an interest in knowing if you have a side hustle, in order to make sure there is no conflict of interest. And failure to disclose is a big deal. Barring that, I don't like "full time and attention" clauses. As long as you provide the services to your employer that you agreed to apply in exchange for your salary, there shouldn't be an issue. I owned a business that was my primary source of income for 15 years and continued to operate for 4 years after reentering the work force. I disclosed it to each every employer and had no issues at all. The only questions are typically "what does it do? (i.e: does it compete with us?)" and one employer asked "how much time does it require of you?" It might vary among industries, but in the tech industry it is pretty common for people to have side projects - including income generating ones. As long as you disclose what you're doing and there is no conflict of interest then, in my experience, employers are pretty lax. And since we're talking about full time jobs, and not owning businesses, there is also the option of going independent as a contractor. Some companies might still try to get you into an exclusive contract, but it's standard to contract to an hourly arrangement and then you can pick up as many contracts as you're comfortable juggling and work the exact amount of hours you want to. I would still disclose and turn down contracts if there were a conflict of interest, for ethical reasons, but from a logistical point of view more people should consider that if they want to work more hours and have that type of flexibility.
- ido 4y ago
  I think the issue is that there's a pretty broad spectrum between "do just enough work to not get fired" and "do the best job you reasonably can". Employers (in tech at least) expect the latter. I wouldn't like working with someone who's on the former end of the spectrum, regardless of the reason.
  - gspencley 4y ago
    Oh agreed. I just think that there are some pretty big assumptions being made about what an individual with a side hustle is capable of achieving. Speaking from personal experience, my promise to my employers was that they were my priority and that I would not allow my side hustle to affect my job performance. It never did. There is also a lot of room for subjective opinions about what it means to "do the best job you reasonably can." Does that mean showing up on time, supporting your team, being available during work hours and producing high-quality work or does it mean giving up on work life balance, being on call and working overtime routinely? It might be my age, but I wouldn't accept a position that expected the latter. But, again speaking from experience, when I continued to operate my business while working full time it came from a place of ambition and wanting to do the best for myself and my family that I could. I worked hard, kicked ass at work and made a lot of money that put my family in a really good position. Obviously there are lazy leeches and employers need to be on the lookout. That's why I prefer that job performance be the metric. Not whether or not someone has other sources of income. In fact, to put on my dark cynical hat for a moment, I think that one reason employers might not like employees with other sources of income is that it means the employee isn't as dependent on the employer and so they don't have the same power dynamic. There are a lot of nasty implications there. I prefer leading through inspiring and having a work environment that is pleasant and fun.
hopeful122 4y ago
> Us IC bottom feeders are 'cattle' to corporations; it seems some have decided to treat companies as 'fodder'. This is appealing, but these people are pretty well compensated all things considered.

Nekorosu 4y ago

Sounds like psychological manipulation and justification of questionable actions from the Tech CEO's side.

latency-guy2 4y ago
Is that what made these tech workers slack on their job? I'll be the first to tell my manager and HR about bad employees, especially the ones that drop the ball so frequently. It doesn't seem like I get any concessions for picking up their slack, so I make it a point to tell others that I am taking up their work and take credit. I don't wish for them to benefit from my benevolence, that's really just me getting stepped on by someone I thought I could rely on myself. If these 'workers' could get fired more often, I applaud this psychological manipulation from the Tech CEO.
- Nekorosu 4y ago
  I don't remember any mentions of them slacking their job. Did I miss it?

javagram 4y ago

I highly doubt it’s in the bounds of the contract with any typical employer. I usually have to sign a clause assigning copyrights for anything work related to the employer, for instance. Working for two tech companies and signing both clauses validly would not be possible since each would require going through an internal process to give permission to contribute code outside the company. That said, if someone is working as an independent contractor being “over employed” would be fine as long as you aren’t double billing your time.

ElevenLathe 4y ago
> I highly doubt it’s in the bounds of the contract with any typical employer. Certainly not any recent contracts since this has popped up on corporate legal departments' radars.
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  What do you mean? I don't think ip assignments have gone away
  - ElevenLathe 4y ago
    My point was that, even if this was OK under most pre-pandemic contracts, you can be sure that savvy legal departments have since put in language that makes it definitely out-of-bounds now.
saagarjha 4y ago
Work on two unrelated things?
- yitchelle 4y ago
  I always wondered how far some companies will go to enforce this. For example if my second job is as a professional actor in the local musical production, would all my creative IP and earnings belong to my main job? Maybe this example is too far remove from reality.
  - Tangurena2 4y ago
    It totally depends on the state you are a resident of. Or the state they sue you in. Some states hold IP arrangements to be toilet paper. Some will enforce even the most egregious ones. I am not a lawyer. It appears to me that being a contractor - rather than a salaried full-time-employee would be the route to go if you are interested in working more than one job. As a salaried FTE, the legal expectation is that you devote yourself 100% to your employer. In business law classes, this is referred to as the "principal agent problem". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal%E2%80%93agent_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal%E2%80%93agent_proble... Business-type people are going to use this viewpoint in order to perceive the situation. In India, there are some laws that basically say that you are required to put your main employer first and that it is effectively illegal for you to work more than one job - no matter how poorly that job pays you. This is one post from very long ago about "work for hire" and IP assignment agreements: https://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=153046 https://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=153046 Another case that I can't fully remember the names of (so no links or references) was of a software developer in Texas or Oklahoma who developed something on his own time. His employer wanted the IP and pursued him in court for almost 2 decades bankrupting him and getting him thrown into jail (for contempt of court) when he refused a court order to turn over the source code and documentation. How far will they go? Well, how much to they hate you? How much spite are they powered by? Narcissists and sociopaths will go to extreme lengths to destroy their "enemies". For a recent example, see ex-President Trump.

wahnfrieden 4y ago

Do you expect and get similarly full transparency on professional engagements from your execs and owners?

ido 4y ago
You're not your execs' and owners' employer.
- wahnfrieden 4y ago
  That’s an obvious tautology
  - ido 4y ago
    I meant the relationship is not symmetrical so it's not such an obvious gatcha that the people at the other end of the relationship aren't expecting to divulge their professional engagements to you but ask for the reverse. Your boss also doesn't have to submit a request for taking time off to you either.
    - wahnfrieden 4y ago
      And why is it so asymmetrical? Why do you accept that? I’m trying to understand your point besides simple reactionism
      - ido 4y ago
        Because most of us don't work in anarchist co-ops?
        snapplebobapple 4y ago
        I don't really get that impression reading the comments. Hacker news seems to be anarchist co-ops all the way down....

gspencley 4y ago

I do think that companies have an interest in knowing if you have a side hustle, in order to make sure there is no conflict of interest. And failure to disclose is a big deal. Barring that, I don't like "full time and attention" clauses. As long as you provide the services to your employer that you agreed to apply in exchange for your salary, there shouldn't be an issue. I owned a business that was my primary source of income for 15 years and continued to operate for 4 years after reentering the work force. I disclosed it to each every employer and had no issues at all. The only questions are typically "what does it do? (i.e: does it compete with us?)" and one employer asked "how much time does it require of you?" It might vary among industries, but in the tech industry it is pretty common for people to have side projects - including income generating ones. As long as you disclose what you're doing and there is no conflict of interest then, in my experience, employers are pretty lax. And since we're talking about full time jobs, and not owning businesses, there is also the option of going independent as a contractor. Some companies might still try to get you into an exclusive contract, but it's standard to contract to an hourly arrangement and then you can pick up as many contracts as you're comfortable juggling and work the exact amount of hours you want to. I would still disclose and turn down contracts if there were a conflict of interest, for ethical reasons, but from a logistical point of view more people should consider that if they want to work more hours and have that type of flexibility.

ido 4y ago
I think the issue is that there's a pretty broad spectrum between "do just enough work to not get fired" and "do the best job you reasonably can". Employers (in tech at least) expect the latter. I wouldn't like working with someone who's on the former end of the spectrum, regardless of the reason.
- gspencley 4y ago
  Oh agreed. I just think that there are some pretty big assumptions being made about what an individual with a side hustle is capable of achieving. Speaking from personal experience, my promise to my employers was that they were my priority and that I would not allow my side hustle to affect my job performance. It never did. There is also a lot of room for subjective opinions about what it means to "do the best job you reasonably can." Does that mean showing up on time, supporting your team, being available during work hours and producing high-quality work or does it mean giving up on work life balance, being on call and working overtime routinely? It might be my age, but I wouldn't accept a position that expected the latter. But, again speaking from experience, when I continued to operate my business while working full time it came from a place of ambition and wanting to do the best for myself and my family that I could. I worked hard, kicked ass at work and made a lot of money that put my family in a really good position. Obviously there are lazy leeches and employers need to be on the lookout. That's why I prefer that job performance be the metric. Not whether or not someone has other sources of income. In fact, to put on my dark cynical hat for a moment, I think that one reason employers might not like employees with other sources of income is that it means the employee isn't as dependent on the employer and so they don't have the same power dynamic. There are a lot of nasty implications there. I prefer leading through inspiring and having a work environment that is pleasant and fun.

hopeful122 4y ago

> Us IC bottom feeders are 'cattle' to corporations; it seems some have decided to treat companies as 'fodder'. This is appealing, but these people are pretty well compensated all things considered.