4 ms·
I only hire people I know I can pay, and when I have the money to pay them. And if that money dries up then their employment ends as well. I don't think it's u
by trevelyan 17y ago
I only hire people I know I can pay, and when I have the money to pay them. And if that money dries up then their employment ends as well.
I don't think it's unreasonable for employees to have some claim on the assets of their employer in certain circumstances. It certainly isn't psychotic. Although it might be psychotic to hire people, use their labor to buy yourself a house, then fold the company and claim your assets are beyond reproach.
- tptacek 17y agoNice. So, if I have a house, and I start a company, and something goes wrong, and you lose your job, you think coming after my house is reasonable. Because after all, we shouldn't hire people unless we're sure we'll always be able to pay them. Because that's how business works. Thankfully, all this really means is that people will incorporate somewhere else where crazy rules like this don't apply.
- trevelyan 17y agoRespectfully, if something goes wrong you should get rid of your employee before you rack up a huge debt to them in unpaid wages, yes.
- kragen 17y agoI don't think either one is psychotic; maybe the term you're looking for is "psychopathic", which has mostly been replaced with "sociopathic".