4 ms·

Please get back to me once you've gotten a multinational corporation to agree to this (or any other candidate-provided clause) for a non-executive employee.

irorodkdj 4y ago
[flagged]
- maxwell 4y ago
  He was at Yandex.
  - kdoxodks 4y ago
    [flagged]
    - nurgasemetey 4y ago
      Wow, smells like 1950s
    - yakireev 4y ago
      > Was Bell hiring Soviet nationals in the heyday of UNIX? I doubt it Could they? Soviet Union did not let its citizens leave easily. It's different nowadays, and you'll be surprised to learn: - that Google an likes have more than enough offices outside the U.S. - that quite a lot of their employees are Russian citizens, Russia has been a talent pool for them for quite a while - that the war changed very little for their employment - and that Google did not stop hiring from Russia after the war began
- qikInNdOutReply 4y ago
  Are we calling those out now, who were ethical and left there home behind? This is a disgusting reply, very well to the anti-japanese craze in america during WW2..
  - kdoxodks 4y ago
    [flagged]
- matrix_overload 4y ago
  That's a very stupid and short-sighted attitude. Russia has effectively been a dictatorship for the past couple of decades, so most regular people have zero control over the policy. Most pretend to just not notice things and hope their lives won't be affected, some tried protesting and ended up jailed, a few prominent idea-driven people got assassinated. So yeah, sure, let's blanket-ban everyone with a Russian passport from Western employment, so the only way for them to feed the family would be joining a guided missile production facility in Russia. Great idea /s. Sanctioning specific companies and specific individuals makes sense. Blanket bans is just venting your own steam in a counterproductive way.
  - kdkdodo 4y ago
    > Sanctioning specific companies and specific individuals makes sense. Blanket bans is just venting your own steam in a counterproductive way. Google has to respond to who the government sanctions. Russia has been sanctioned and it rightfully makes Google wary of doing business with them. If you think sanctions are counterproductive, you can vote for the GOP, because people like Matt Gaetz are fighting to end the involvement of the US with the war but until that happens it's understandable that companies aligned with allied countries would become averse to hiring Russian nationals
    - matrix_overload 4y ago
      Sanctions prohibit transactions with specific companies, banks, and a few other entities. They actually make a lot of economic sense, as they are designed to weaken the parts of the economy used to fund the Russian warfare. Sanctions against private citizens in Russia would tangentially contribute by reducing the cash flow inside the country. Targeting random people that are actually trying to leave the country is like what? You expect them to instead go take pitchforks and storm Putin's bunker? Or kill themselves out of shame? More likely, they'll find whatever employment there is inside the country and pays well, and chances are, it will be closely related to the Russian government.
  - mnky9800n 4y ago
    completely agree with you. the leader of the political opposition was murdered in front of the kremlin wall by being shot repeatedly by chechnyans hired by the government directly linked to Putin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Boris_Nemtsov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Boris_Nemtsov The same is true for the attempts on Navelny, etc. Russia has put literally thousands of people in jail for protesting the war. And if we really are going to make a big deal out of russia attacking ukraine and how terrible that is and we should ostracize all russian people, then we should all start with the americans first. Because the iraq war was motivated as well as ukraine, caused the deaths of a million iraqis, and americans travel freely and nobody cares that they come from a country responsible for such death and travesty.
cleansy 4y ago
I never had to deal with multinationals - not much of a corporate guy. I was reading through the comments here and it seemed to be common that "well, there's nothing you can do". Actually, there is, write it in your contract and see what comes back. If your new employer does not allow for this, at least a) you tried and b) you are fully aware of the risk that the employer might just leave you out cold. In which case, going all-in as the author did could have been avoided.
- PragmaticPulp 4y ago
  > write it in your contract and see what comes back The issue is that in many countries, employees don’t actually have contracts. Lawyers will go to great lengths to ensure that offer letters are not structured as contracts. It’s important to keep the distinction in mind.
- xnorswap 4y ago
  I've also not worked for mega-corps, but I've also had good experience with writing things into contracts and having them agreed to. I find it odd that people are fine with contract negotiation when it comes to remuneration but treat actual contract clauses like holy text that can't be changed. There's even a good chance that what you think is "unchanging boilerplate" is boilerplate that gets updated all the time and barely anyone is on the same contract anyway, or that it is very job role or department specific. That said, I've mostly worked at SMEs which can be more flexible anyway, and getting a contract change is a good indicator of their general flexibility so perhaps works as a good filter too.
  - gdilla 4y ago
    oh, it can be changed. The real question is, would they bother changing it (and having legal review blah blah) for you.
  - dclowd9901 4y ago
    I think the standard experience is “this hiring rep is barely competent enough to call me back, why the hell would they have the pull to change a contract?”
PragmaticPulp 4y ago
Getting a completely custom legal document from a big company is not going to happen outside of extraordinary circumstances. That said, the relocation packages I’ve seen have been effectively similar to this. Having the offer revoked for cause (e.g. you lied) might cancel it, but getting laid off wouldn’t. Obviously not true everywhere though.
ska 4y ago
I've seen similar clauses in a bunch of contracts, it can't be that rare. You are unlikely to be able to add your own language (as per your case of non-exec) but you may not have to.

irorodkdj 4y ago

[flagged]

maxwell 4y ago
He was at Yandex.
- kdoxodks 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - nurgasemetey 4y ago
    Wow, smells like 1950s
  - yakireev 4y ago
    > Was Bell hiring Soviet nationals in the heyday of UNIX? I doubt it Could they? Soviet Union did not let its citizens leave easily. It's different nowadays, and you'll be surprised to learn: - that Google an likes have more than enough offices outside the U.S. - that quite a lot of their employees are Russian citizens, Russia has been a talent pool for them for quite a while - that the war changed very little for their employment - and that Google did not stop hiring from Russia after the war began
qikInNdOutReply 4y ago
Are we calling those out now, who were ethical and left there home behind? This is a disgusting reply, very well to the anti-japanese craze in america during WW2..
- kdoxodks 4y ago
  [flagged]
matrix_overload 4y ago
That's a very stupid and short-sighted attitude. Russia has effectively been a dictatorship for the past couple of decades, so most regular people have zero control over the policy. Most pretend to just not notice things and hope their lives won't be affected, some tried protesting and ended up jailed, a few prominent idea-driven people got assassinated. So yeah, sure, let's blanket-ban everyone with a Russian passport from Western employment, so the only way for them to feed the family would be joining a guided missile production facility in Russia. Great idea /s. Sanctioning specific companies and specific individuals makes sense. Blanket bans is just venting your own steam in a counterproductive way.
- kdkdodo 4y ago
  > Sanctioning specific companies and specific individuals makes sense. Blanket bans is just venting your own steam in a counterproductive way. Google has to respond to who the government sanctions. Russia has been sanctioned and it rightfully makes Google wary of doing business with them. If you think sanctions are counterproductive, you can vote for the GOP, because people like Matt Gaetz are fighting to end the involvement of the US with the war but until that happens it's understandable that companies aligned with allied countries would become averse to hiring Russian nationals
  - matrix_overload 4y ago
    Sanctions prohibit transactions with specific companies, banks, and a few other entities. They actually make a lot of economic sense, as they are designed to weaken the parts of the economy used to fund the Russian warfare. Sanctions against private citizens in Russia would tangentially contribute by reducing the cash flow inside the country. Targeting random people that are actually trying to leave the country is like what? You expect them to instead go take pitchforks and storm Putin's bunker? Or kill themselves out of shame? More likely, they'll find whatever employment there is inside the country and pays well, and chances are, it will be closely related to the Russian government.
- mnky9800n 4y ago
  completely agree with you. the leader of the political opposition was murdered in front of the kremlin wall by being shot repeatedly by chechnyans hired by the government directly linked to Putin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Boris_Nemtsov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Boris_Nemtsov The same is true for the attempts on Navelny, etc. Russia has put literally thousands of people in jail for protesting the war. And if we really are going to make a big deal out of russia attacking ukraine and how terrible that is and we should ostracize all russian people, then we should all start with the americans first. Because the iraq war was motivated as well as ukraine, caused the deaths of a million iraqis, and americans travel freely and nobody cares that they come from a country responsible for such death and travesty.

cleansy 4y ago

I never had to deal with multinationals - not much of a corporate guy. I was reading through the comments here and it seemed to be common that "well, there's nothing you can do". Actually, there is, write it in your contract and see what comes back. If your new employer does not allow for this, at least a) you tried and b) you are fully aware of the risk that the employer might just leave you out cold. In which case, going all-in as the author did could have been avoided.

PragmaticPulp 4y ago
> write it in your contract and see what comes back The issue is that in many countries, employees don’t actually have contracts. Lawyers will go to great lengths to ensure that offer letters are not structured as contracts. It’s important to keep the distinction in mind.
xnorswap 4y ago
I've also not worked for mega-corps, but I've also had good experience with writing things into contracts and having them agreed to. I find it odd that people are fine with contract negotiation when it comes to remuneration but treat actual contract clauses like holy text that can't be changed. There's even a good chance that what you think is "unchanging boilerplate" is boilerplate that gets updated all the time and barely anyone is on the same contract anyway, or that it is very job role or department specific. That said, I've mostly worked at SMEs which can be more flexible anyway, and getting a contract change is a good indicator of their general flexibility so perhaps works as a good filter too.
- gdilla 4y ago
  oh, it can be changed. The real question is, would they bother changing it (and having legal review blah blah) for you.
- dclowd9901 4y ago
  I think the standard experience is “this hiring rep is barely competent enough to call me back, why the hell would they have the pull to change a contract?”

PragmaticPulp 4y ago

Getting a completely custom legal document from a big company is not going to happen outside of extraordinary circumstances. That said, the relocation packages I’ve seen have been effectively similar to this. Having the offer revoked for cause (e.g. you lied) might cancel it, but getting laid off wouldn’t. Obviously not true everywhere though.

ska 4y ago

I've seen similar clauses in a bunch of contracts, it can't be that rare. You are unlikely to be able to add your own language (as per your case of non-exec) but you may not have to.