4 ms·

> retweets ... using your own personal account. No, I think it's pretty clear. Once information is publish via the company's twitter account, it becomes publi

by jmj42 13y ago

> retweets ... using your own personal account. No, I think it's pretty clear. Once information is publish via the company's twitter account, it becomes public information. It would be a very long stretch for retweeting public information to change the nature of a personal account to fall under this law. Not to mention, Illinois' has notoriously labor friendly courts (I live in IL). While landing in court is an obvious problem for the employee to defend/prosecute, the reputation/record of IL labor courts make it an even steeper hill for an employeer to climb than for the employee.

hkmurakami 13y ago
Hmm, how about things like tweeting links to your company's blog, your company's product, or your company's documentation? This probably happens a little bit less frequently but enough for us to at least take a cursory look. While I would hope that most startups are above this kind of behavior, since startups tend to ask their people to use their personal accounts for marketing purposes, I have to at least have some concern...
- tptacek 13y ago
  Like I said downthread, reading the statute in the airless vacuum of a message board, it's easy to try to poke holes in it. In reality, anything that amounts of an exception to the at-will doctrine creates an enormous minefield for employers. Terminated employees are very frequently disgruntled and can be counted on, over time, in the large, to bring meritless cases. Employers who want to survive without being stuck up for settlements are going to become very process-bound for how they handle credentials. Think of it this way: worst-case downside to employee from this law: early termination. Downside to employer: horrifically expensive legal debacle.
caseysoftware 13y ago
According to the various quotes I've read there's no "non-public information" requirement.. just the vague "for business purposes" part. While Twitter is the obvious example, what about a Github account? I've patched bugs or merged pull requests for my employer's projects from my own account. Would that qualify?
- tptacek 13y ago
  You should be careful about letting your employers' code hit your personal Github site for other reasons; an employer who wants to make it difficult for you to get a new business started can use IP issues to accomplish that. Personal Github accounts are already a little bit fraught for that reason. The Illinois statute revision doesn't change the calculus; if you're an IL employee with a Github account you care about, you (a) don't want to be working for anyone who demands credentials to it, and (b) now have an avenue to extract a few tens of thousands of dollars from that employer should they ever be dumb enough to ask and then fire you.

by jmj42 13y ago

hkmurakami 13y ago

Hmm, how about things like tweeting links to your company's blog, your company's product, or your company's documentation? This probably happens a little bit less frequently but enough for us to at least take a cursory look. While I would hope that most startups are above this kind of behavior, since startups tend to ask their people to use their personal accounts for marketing purposes, I have to at least have some concern...

tptacek 13y ago
Like I said downthread, reading the statute in the airless vacuum of a message board, it's easy to try to poke holes in it. In reality, anything that amounts of an exception to the at-will doctrine creates an enormous minefield for employers. Terminated employees are very frequently disgruntled and can be counted on, over time, in the large, to bring meritless cases. Employers who want to survive without being stuck up for settlements are going to become very process-bound for how they handle credentials. Think of it this way: worst-case downside to employee from this law: early termination. Downside to employer: horrifically expensive legal debacle.

caseysoftware 13y ago

According to the various quotes I've read there's no "non-public information" requirement.. just the vague "for business purposes" part. While Twitter is the obvious example, what about a Github account? I've patched bugs or merged pull requests for my employer's projects from my own account. Would that qualify?

tptacek 13y ago
You should be careful about letting your employers' code hit your personal Github site for other reasons; an employer who wants to make it difficult for you to get a new business started can use IP issues to accomplish that. Personal Github accounts are already a little bit fraught for that reason. The Illinois statute revision doesn't change the calculus; if you're an IL employee with a Github account you care about, you (a) don't want to be working for anyone who demands credentials to it, and (b) now have an avenue to extract a few tens of thousands of dollars from that employer should they ever be dumb enough to ask and then fire you.