4 ms·
The company is offering extra weeks of pay in return for not attacking them. Why is this different than getting paid to do your job or meet a contract in other
by crusso 13y ago
The company is offering extra weeks of pay in return for not attacking them.
Why is this different than getting paid to do your job or meet a contract in other respects?
- CaveTech 13y agoIt must be different in California, because here in Ontario companies are legally required to give at least 2 weeks severance in most instances. If an employer isn't required to do the same in California then there's not much to complain about. Is this the case?
- spiralpolitik 13y agoCalifornia is what is referred to as an "at will" state which means the company can let you go tomorrow without recourse or explanation beyond "we're letting you go" [1]. ([1] There is legislation that comes into play if you let enough people go at the same time that its considered a "layoff". But it doesn't come into play for an individual termination)
- _delirium 13y agoThat's indeed true in California, but "at will" employment doesn't strictly require that. At-will employment means either side can terminate the employment arrangement for any or no cause, as distinguished from jurisdictions that require a reason for termination. It's still compatible with having a short notice period, e.g. requiring that employees give 2 weeks notice before quitting, and/or that employers give 2 weeks notice before termination.
- LanceH 13y agoTwo weeks severance isn't traditionally "extra pay". It's generally a professional courtesy that they are now withholding until the no-longer-employee agrees to an everlasting requirement. The flip side: Offer two weeks notice, but only if they agree to speak of you on your terms afterward. No company signs that. They would be liable for anything anyone in the company ever said about you, forever. It's also exceptionally vague and even if it only applies to lies spoken by the employee, it can still have a chilling effect on the truth.
- crusso 13y agoIt's also "professional courtesy" to not trash people... but there you have it, so what would you be giving up if everyone is being "professional". You can forego the two weeks severance if it isn't worth it and you really want to trash them. Having been both on the employee and the employer side of things, as an employer it really sucks to do something nice that you don't have to like give someone a severance package and then have them be a jerk by trying to hurt you in some way.
- ojbyrne 13y agoThere's a difference between "not trashing people" and not saying anything under threat of lawsuit. Pretty well anything can be interpreted as disparaging. You could say something as simple as "they fired me, I don't think it was fair." and find yourself liable.
- crusso 13y agoThe reality is that bringing a lawsuit against a former employee is a huge expense and as others have mentioned - unlikely to even get anywhere. So unless you want to cherry pick extremely unlikely situations, this separation agreement clause is a no-op and probably worth signing.
- jrockway 13y agoDying startups tend to do a lot of stupid things. Why risk it?
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- a3n 13y agoYou're being offered two weeks of pay for behavior that will last effectively forever.
- er35826 13y agoNo limitation on the clause is a big concern. If you write a public review 3 years later about how a product from that company sucks, that could be held as a breach of this contract you signed, and would at the very least be a non-free legal headache for you. A headache that would likely cost you much more than the company to deal with, to boot.