4 ms·
Submission title mentions NDA but the article also mentions a non disparagement agreement. "You can't give away our trade secrets" is one thing but it sounds li
by MBlume 2y ago
Submission title mentions NDA but the article also mentions a non disparagement agreement. "You can't give away our trade secrets" is one thing but it sounds like they're being told they can't say anything critical of the company at all.
- reducesuffering 2y agoThey can't even mention the NDA exists!
- danielmarkbruce 2y agoThis is common, and there is nothing wrong with it.
- Chinjut 2y agoThere is absolutely something wrong with it. Just because a thing is common doesn't make it good.
- danielmarkbruce 2y agoTwo people entering an agreement to not talk about something is fine. You and I should (and can, with very few restrictions) be able to agree that I'll do x, and you'll do y and we are going to keep the matter private. Anyone who wants to take away this ability for two people to do such a thing needs to take a long hard look at themselves, and maybe move to north korea.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- hnfong 2y agoThere are things that are legal between parties of (presumed) equal footing, that aren't legal between employers and employees. That's why you can pay $1 to buy a gadget made in some third world country, but you can't pay your employees less than say $8/hour due to minimum wage laws.
- danielmarkbruce 2y agoYes, as noted there are a few exceptions. Being paid a whole lot of money to not talk about something isn't remotely similar to paying someone a few dollars an hour. It's not morally similar, it's not legally similar and it's not treated similarly by anyone who deals with these matters and has a clue what they are doing.