10 ms·

And I was soon informed that the president wished to assure me that there is nothing unusual about such clauses Whoop whoop whoop! This sets off giant alarm b

And I was soon informed that the president wished to assure me that there is nothing unusual about such clauses Whoop whoop whoop! This sets off giant alarm bells in my head. It might be totally normal. That doesn't mean you should sign it. It's also an older-than-dirt salesman tactic to say that something you just made up is "totally common." Of course, the company can attach whatever clauses it wants to a separation agreement. You aren't entitled to a severance payment. I'll tell other engineers that two weeks' salary is a piddly amount for the company for you to surrender such rights. You can just walk away. They are the ones who want you to sign that. (It's kind of ironic, but after you have been given notice you are fired, you have power. They want you to do certain things, and what are they going to do? Fire you? Already did that. Withhold pay? Illegal.)

JackFr 13y ago
I've been through the process twice, and in neither case was there any pressure to sign the document. In both cases I was advised to speak to a lawyer if I was unsure or uncertain about anything, to feel free to contact them with any clarifications and in one case I expressly forbidden from signing it in the HR office and told to mail it back. A lawyer would tell you that such a clause is common, is somewhat enforceable, and rarely enforced. The situation primarily being avoided is airing specific, proprietary, disparaging information.
neohaven 13y ago
Depending on where you are, "severance", or the 2-week pay after you have been told you do not have a job anymore, may or may not be a worker's right.
- poopsintub 13y ago
  I've never heard of severance in the U.S. being mandatory or illegal to withhold if say, they did it for every other employee that left the company prior. I think unemployment benefits takes care of this.
- chimeracoder 13y ago
  IANAL, but while that may be true in general, California (where the author was employed[0]) is an at-will state, and most people reading HN (in fact, most people working at startups in general) are likely to be employed at-will. AFAIK, that means that they are not entitled to any severance unless their initial contract stipulated otherwise. [0] Actually, where the company was based we don't know which employment laws applied to his contract without reading it. You can be a California resident employed by a Delaware corporation operating out of California and your contract can still be subject the the employment laws of a third state. I'm not entirely sure how this actually works in practice, but I know it is done. EDIT Some quick Googling found this website, which has some interesting information (albeit a rather terrible layout): http://www.careerprotection.com/severancepay.html http://www.careerprotection.com/severancepay.html
  - logfromblammo 13y ago
    While working in at-will states, the severance agreement may in fact be the first document you sign that is actually legally binding upon the company in any way. Most offers I see are clear that the letter is not a contract, and no contract can even exist without direct and explicit intervention by the CEO. And that seems to be a left-handed way of saying that if you do try to get an actual contract, you will not be successful, and the offer of employment will be withdrawn. I would very much like to see more at-will workers do same-day resignations when they change jobs, possibly even writing their own severance agreements. It isn't unprofessional to abruptly walk out on the job if giving notice was never in the requirements. And most of the time, all that you get for the courtesy of making it easier for the employer to replace you is a payout for your accumulated vacation time, if anything.
    - cbr 13y ago
      It isn't unprofessional to abruptly walk out on the job if giving notice was never in the requirements. While you would be fully within your legal rights to quit without notice, and they would be fully within theirs to fire you effective immediately with no severance, both would be rude, contrary to custom, and unprofessional. It's reasonable and healthy to have customs that are not fully backed by the law, and trying to set up the law to fully match our senses of justice would be massive overengineering.
- jgalt212 13y ago
  If it's a mass layoff, the event will probably fall under the WARN act which requires 60 days notice for "full-time" workers. http://humanresources.about.com/od/glossaryw/qt/WARN_Act.htm http://humanresources.about.com/od/glossaryw/qt/WARN_Act.htm
  - harryh 13y ago
    Only if it's part of a "plant closing."
  - jgalt212 13y ago
    plant closing is loosely defined. I worked at a bank that closed a division, and the division closing fell under the WARN Act.
  - coldcode 13y ago
    I am currently awaiting a 60 day notice, as 80% of the company is being laid off. Our parent company recently laid off a number of folks who only got 30 as the company is eliminating a large portion of the company.
  - TomSawyer 13y ago
    A place that I worked at two years ago laid off 2/3 of the company just 49 days after I'd joined. They weren't as brain dead as the federal legislature so they simply framed it as temporary for five months which falls under the requirements of "WARN."
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
crusso 13y ago
I'll tell other engineers that two weeks' salary is a piddly amount for the company for you to surrender such rights So it isn't worth just moving on with your career for, say, $3k (assuming a moderate $80k/yr salary)? Seems like Internet bravado to me. I click okay on all sorts of terms of use agreements for my PS3 just to play some games.
- dubcanada 13y ago
  The stuff I agree too just to play video games, I'm surprised I still have legal rights sometimes...
  - kanamekun 13y ago
    South Park made a whole episode about this (re: Apple's terms of use) a few years ago: http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s15e01-humancentipad http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s15e01-humance...
    - zafka 13y ago
      That is where good intentions for wise use of time go....
  - at-fates-hands 13y ago
    Agreed I had a friend who was a contract lawyer, and pointed out several clauses in my wireless contract and my internet contract. It was pretty eye opening. Needless to say, you'd be surprised what you agree to when you sign contracts: "Please be aware that we may change your wireless device's software, applications or programming remotely, without notice."
    - ama729 13y ago
      > "Please be aware that we may change your wireless device's software, applications or programming remotely, without notice." Which mean they update your modem (which is not yours btw, it's a part of your ISP infrastructure) for you, not that ominous IMO.
jaynos 13y ago
IANAL, but is that clause even enforceable if tied to severance? Seems like a reasonable argument could be made that signing such a clause when tied to severance negotiations would fall under "duress" from a legal standpoint.
- danielweber 13y ago
  If the company says "sign in the next 5 minutes or else" than maybe. But the company wants you to sign. And the lawyers who crafted up the contract don't want it to be thrown out for some stupid reason, so they will advise your (about to be ex-)employer to let you take it home to read it and think about it.
- njharman 13y ago
  The opposite. To be legally enforceable each party to a contract must be receiving something of value. Duress would apply if someone is forcing you to sign.
pasbesoin 13y ago
If you are leaving employment on unfriendly terms, it will serve you well to sign nothing without consulting an attorney (preferably one specializing in employment law and contracts). (This, of course, does nothing for what you may have signed upon becoming employed, nor what they may have shoved under your pen while you were employed.) Generally, the incentives are relatively small, and what you are giving up is potentially rather greater. This is why they attempt it -- risk reduction. I'm aware of proposed agreements that, for a few thousand dollars in a one time payout, cause the formerly employed to abrogate supposedly all rights to sue, on any basis. Granted, that may not be entirely enforceable. But it's another considerable hurdle to surmount if and as you feel and determine yourself to have been wronged. First, you have to attempt to break out of the binding arbitration -- if any -- that such contracts impose. I'd rather have a few expensive suits and management sweat a bit more, if nothing else, in such circumstances. Tie them up with more paperwork and tracking. If nothing else, it helps to keep them on their toes and perhaps less likely to screw the next guy. And yes, again, in such circumstances, somewhat of that perspective is prescribed. No matter how well you may have gotten on with your co-workers and immediate management, the company is not / no longer your friend. You will feel and manage much better if you have prepared yourself for such an event, however unlikely you may currently consider it to be. Have enough cash and liquid assets on-hand to ride out such a period of unemployment. Don't assume you will have unemployment benefits when making such calculations; if a business decides it wants to screw you, they can at least delay the granting of such -- though you should contest such a tactic. (And, in that regard, documentation is your friend. Keep printouts of relevant material. If you feel things are going south, keep a separate, datestamped journal documenting specific events in detail.) If you have assets on hand, you will feel less motivated to take such a payout, especially not one that is rushed upon you with a very limited window for consideration. You may also decide it is worth the money to at least consult with an attorney (that you are paying by the hour, not on contingency) for an independent and professional opinion. Many people on HN are at least ostensibly "professionals". A few thousand, for a regular, full-time employee, should not make or break you. Look towards handling your end of such an employment arrangement professionally. Even if it costs you a bit of money, you will likely feel much better about yourself and how you've handled the situation. And that self-esteem, aside from any (frankly, unlikely) favorable financial outcome, can pay off significantly as you move on with your life. Just my opinion...
walshemj 13y ago
Of course asking for this agreement implies that they have done something wrong :-) "so mr employer you admit you have done something illegal either by omission or commission and you want me to sign a compromise agreement?" Well I am sure that my lawyers will be interested can you let me who in hr is your GC (lawyer) and I am sure we can sort something out or I will settle for 6 months right now.
- vidarh 13y ago
  No, it implies that they are worried about what you might say or do. And possibly not specifically you, but the odds in general of some employee or other deciding to cause a nuisance, whether or not they deserve it. Or they have an overzealous HR person or lawyer. Or any number of other things. Of course they might also be a bunch of criminals, but I don't think an agreement like that implies anything in either direction.
  - walshemj 13y ago
    Well they asked first so "no smoke with out fire eh" putting it in writing gives the impression that they have something to hide. Over zealous/incompetent HR is probably the correct answer. Seriously if you where a cop questioning some one and they blurt out I want to do a deal at the start of the interview what woudl you think Normally in NCIS when the person getting interviewed by Jethro asks for a deal - they are the perp.
halostatue 13y ago
That depends on the jurisdiction. Ontario has fairly strong employment standards, including documents on severance pay and termination pay.
nemesisj 13y ago
I love it whenever anyone insists something "isn't a big deal" or they don't care about it that much. I will simply say that it is a big deal to me, so if it's not a big deal to them, they might as well do it my way. This works in almost all cases, or the other party has to backtrack and then at least we're negotiating on more transparent terms.
- ibrad 13y ago
  So what happens when I sign and still rant about the company. Say on my blog. The company is already struggling financially it will cost them to fight back.
  - jusben1369 13y ago
    Yeah but you're not going to have a leg to stand on so any lawyer is going to tell you to settle immediately if they even threaten to go after you.
    - danielweber 13y ago
      Maybe, maybe not. Legal action is costly for both sides.
      - jusben1369 13y ago
        Not if you're awarded legal fees.
        vacri 13y ago
        Someone who signs because they need two weeks' pay isn't going to be able to afford both sides of a legal fight. You still have to pay your lawyer while you're waiting for the other side to stump up the money.
        ScottWhigham 13y ago
        If "you're awarded legal fees", it only happens as a result of a trial/hearing. The cost to prepare + present at trial might be very substantial.
mathattack 13y ago
In this case, it is totally normal. In return for a payment, you agree to keep quiet. I don't know of any other firm that gives severance without this. What is abnormal is that someone is being asked to sign it for 2 weeks of salary.
- jusben1369 13y ago
  Yes I'm with you. First thing that happens is i) BOD tells management to do layoff's to preserve cash then ii) Legal talks to outside or inside counsel and gets the generic playbook for layoffs (including termination template language) then iii) CEO, CFO and VP of HR discuss actual terms of severance. Maybe even one gets simply two weeks. Maybe more senior (time or responsibility) get 3 or 4 weeks etc. Either way decision is determined and married to boilerplate RIF template. iv) String of events leads to a writer ($50,000 a year? $75,000 a year?) looking at a paltry two weeks of revenue in exchange for disparagement clause. Seems completely out of whack with his beliefs and the amount being offered.
  - mathattack 13y ago
    And frequently the # is negotiable, though it can require a lawyer to do the negotiating. Some work on contingency. (I've never been through the process, but have seen enough layoffs to have watched people negotiate their #s)
ujsfdo 13y ago
Whoop! Whoop! Dat's the sound of da police!
mistakoala 13y ago
Just wondering - particularly as I have no experience of the US employment market - but is it common for soon-to-be employees to negotiate a standard severance package into their contract of employment?
- genwin 13y ago
  No, not in my experience anyway.

JackFr 13y ago

I've been through the process twice, and in neither case was there any pressure to sign the document. In both cases I was advised to speak to a lawyer if I was unsure or uncertain about anything, to feel free to contact them with any clarifications and in one case I expressly forbidden from signing it in the HR office and told to mail it back. A lawyer would tell you that such a clause is common, is somewhat enforceable, and rarely enforced. The situation primarily being avoided is airing specific, proprietary, disparaging information.

neohaven 13y ago

Depending on where you are, "severance", or the 2-week pay after you have been told you do not have a job anymore, may or may not be a worker's right.

poopsintub 13y ago
I've never heard of severance in the U.S. being mandatory or illegal to withhold if say, they did it for every other employee that left the company prior. I think unemployment benefits takes care of this.
chimeracoder 13y ago
IANAL, but while that may be true in general, California (where the author was employed[0]) is an at-will state, and most people reading HN (in fact, most people working at startups in general) are likely to be employed at-will. AFAIK, that means that they are not entitled to any severance unless their initial contract stipulated otherwise. [0] Actually, where the company was based we don't know which employment laws applied to his contract without reading it. You can be a California resident employed by a Delaware corporation operating out of California and your contract can still be subject the the employment laws of a third state. I'm not entirely sure how this actually works in practice, but I know it is done. EDIT Some quick Googling found this website, which has some interesting information (albeit a rather terrible layout): http://www.careerprotection.com/severancepay.html http://www.careerprotection.com/severancepay.html
- logfromblammo 13y ago
  While working in at-will states, the severance agreement may in fact be the first document you sign that is actually legally binding upon the company in any way. Most offers I see are clear that the letter is not a contract, and no contract can even exist without direct and explicit intervention by the CEO. And that seems to be a left-handed way of saying that if you do try to get an actual contract, you will not be successful, and the offer of employment will be withdrawn. I would very much like to see more at-will workers do same-day resignations when they change jobs, possibly even writing their own severance agreements. It isn't unprofessional to abruptly walk out on the job if giving notice was never in the requirements. And most of the time, all that you get for the courtesy of making it easier for the employer to replace you is a payout for your accumulated vacation time, if anything.
  - cbr 13y ago
    It isn't unprofessional to abruptly walk out on the job if giving notice was never in the requirements. While you would be fully within your legal rights to quit without notice, and they would be fully within theirs to fire you effective immediately with no severance, both would be rude, contrary to custom, and unprofessional. It's reasonable and healthy to have customs that are not fully backed by the law, and trying to set up the law to fully match our senses of justice would be massive overengineering.
jgalt212 13y ago
If it's a mass layoff, the event will probably fall under the WARN act which requires 60 days notice for "full-time" workers. http://humanresources.about.com/od/glossaryw/qt/WARN_Act.htm http://humanresources.about.com/od/glossaryw/qt/WARN_Act.htm
- harryh 13y ago
  Only if it's part of a "plant closing."
- jgalt212 13y ago
  plant closing is loosely defined. I worked at a bank that closed a division, and the division closing fell under the WARN Act.
- coldcode 13y ago
  I am currently awaiting a 60 day notice, as 80% of the company is being laid off. Our parent company recently laid off a number of folks who only got 30 as the company is eliminating a large portion of the company.
- TomSawyer 13y ago
  A place that I worked at two years ago laid off 2/3 of the company just 49 days after I'd joined. They weren't as brain dead as the federal legislature so they simply framed it as temporary for five months which falls under the requirements of "WARN."

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

crusso 13y ago

I'll tell other engineers that two weeks' salary is a piddly amount for the company for you to surrender such rights So it isn't worth just moving on with your career for, say, $3k (assuming a moderate $80k/yr salary)? Seems like Internet bravado to me. I click okay on all sorts of terms of use agreements for my PS3 just to play some games.

dubcanada 13y ago
The stuff I agree too just to play video games, I'm surprised I still have legal rights sometimes...
- kanamekun 13y ago
  South Park made a whole episode about this (re: Apple's terms of use) a few years ago: http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s15e01-humancentipad http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s15e01-humance...
  - zafka 13y ago
    That is where good intentions for wise use of time go....
- at-fates-hands 13y ago
  Agreed I had a friend who was a contract lawyer, and pointed out several clauses in my wireless contract and my internet contract. It was pretty eye opening. Needless to say, you'd be surprised what you agree to when you sign contracts: "Please be aware that we may change your wireless device's software, applications or programming remotely, without notice."
  - ama729 13y ago
    > "Please be aware that we may change your wireless device's software, applications or programming remotely, without notice." Which mean they update your modem (which is not yours btw, it's a part of your ISP infrastructure) for you, not that ominous IMO.

jaynos 13y ago

IANAL, but is that clause even enforceable if tied to severance? Seems like a reasonable argument could be made that signing such a clause when tied to severance negotiations would fall under "duress" from a legal standpoint.

danielweber 13y ago
If the company says "sign in the next 5 minutes or else" than maybe. But the company wants you to sign. And the lawyers who crafted up the contract don't want it to be thrown out for some stupid reason, so they will advise your (about to be ex-)employer to let you take it home to read it and think about it.
njharman 13y ago
The opposite. To be legally enforceable each party to a contract must be receiving something of value. Duress would apply if someone is forcing you to sign.

pasbesoin 13y ago

If you are leaving employment on unfriendly terms, it will serve you well to sign nothing without consulting an attorney (preferably one specializing in employment law and contracts). (This, of course, does nothing for what you may have signed upon becoming employed, nor what they may have shoved under your pen while you were employed.) Generally, the incentives are relatively small, and what you are giving up is potentially rather greater. This is why they attempt it -- risk reduction. I'm aware of proposed agreements that, for a few thousand dollars in a one time payout, cause the formerly employed to abrogate supposedly all rights to sue, on any basis. Granted, that may not be entirely enforceable. But it's another considerable hurdle to surmount if and as you feel and determine yourself to have been wronged. First, you have to attempt to break out of the binding arbitration -- if any -- that such contracts impose. I'd rather have a few expensive suits and management sweat a bit more, if nothing else, in such circumstances. Tie them up with more paperwork and tracking. If nothing else, it helps to keep them on their toes and perhaps less likely to screw the next guy. And yes, again, in such circumstances, somewhat of that perspective is prescribed. No matter how well you may have gotten on with your co-workers and immediate management, the company is not / no longer your friend. You will feel and manage much better if you have prepared yourself for such an event, however unlikely you may currently consider it to be. Have enough cash and liquid assets on-hand to ride out such a period of unemployment. Don't assume you will have unemployment benefits when making such calculations; if a business decides it wants to screw you, they can at least delay the granting of such -- though you should contest such a tactic. (And, in that regard, documentation is your friend. Keep printouts of relevant material. If you feel things are going south, keep a separate, datestamped journal documenting specific events in detail.) If you have assets on hand, you will feel less motivated to take such a payout, especially not one that is rushed upon you with a very limited window for consideration. You may also decide it is worth the money to at least consult with an attorney (that you are paying by the hour, not on contingency) for an independent and professional opinion. Many people on HN are at least ostensibly "professionals". A few thousand, for a regular, full-time employee, should not make or break you. Look towards handling your end of such an employment arrangement professionally. Even if it costs you a bit of money, you will likely feel much better about yourself and how you've handled the situation. And that self-esteem, aside from any (frankly, unlikely) favorable financial outcome, can pay off significantly as you move on with your life. Just my opinion...

walshemj 13y ago

Of course asking for this agreement implies that they have done something wrong :-) "so mr employer you admit you have done something illegal either by omission or commission and you want me to sign a compromise agreement?" Well I am sure that my lawyers will be interested can you let me who in hr is your GC (lawyer) and I am sure we can sort something out or I will settle for 6 months right now.

vidarh 13y ago
No, it implies that they are worried about what you might say or do. And possibly not specifically you, but the odds in general of some employee or other deciding to cause a nuisance, whether or not they deserve it. Or they have an overzealous HR person or lawyer. Or any number of other things. Of course they might also be a bunch of criminals, but I don't think an agreement like that implies anything in either direction.
- walshemj 13y ago
  Well they asked first so "no smoke with out fire eh" putting it in writing gives the impression that they have something to hide. Over zealous/incompetent HR is probably the correct answer. Seriously if you where a cop questioning some one and they blurt out I want to do a deal at the start of the interview what woudl you think Normally in NCIS when the person getting interviewed by Jethro asks for a deal - they are the perp.

halostatue 13y ago

That depends on the jurisdiction. Ontario has fairly strong employment standards, including documents on severance pay and termination pay.

nemesisj 13y ago

I love it whenever anyone insists something "isn't a big deal" or they don't care about it that much. I will simply say that it is a big deal to me, so if it's not a big deal to them, they might as well do it my way. This works in almost all cases, or the other party has to backtrack and then at least we're negotiating on more transparent terms.

ibrad 13y ago
So what happens when I sign and still rant about the company. Say on my blog. The company is already struggling financially it will cost them to fight back.
- jusben1369 13y ago
  Yeah but you're not going to have a leg to stand on so any lawyer is going to tell you to settle immediately if they even threaten to go after you.
  - danielweber 13y ago
    Maybe, maybe not. Legal action is costly for both sides.
    - jusben1369 13y ago
      Not if you're awarded legal fees.
      - vacri 13y ago
        Someone who signs because they need two weeks' pay isn't going to be able to afford both sides of a legal fight. You still have to pay your lawyer while you're waiting for the other side to stump up the money.
      - ScottWhigham 13y ago
        If "you're awarded legal fees", it only happens as a result of a trial/hearing. The cost to prepare + present at trial might be very substantial.

mathattack 13y ago

In this case, it is totally normal. In return for a payment, you agree to keep quiet. I don't know of any other firm that gives severance without this. What is abnormal is that someone is being asked to sign it for 2 weeks of salary.

jusben1369 13y ago
Yes I'm with you. First thing that happens is i) BOD tells management to do layoff's to preserve cash then ii) Legal talks to outside or inside counsel and gets the generic playbook for layoffs (including termination template language) then iii) CEO, CFO and VP of HR discuss actual terms of severance. Maybe even one gets simply two weeks. Maybe more senior (time or responsibility) get 3 or 4 weeks etc. Either way decision is determined and married to boilerplate RIF template. iv) String of events leads to a writer ($50,000 a year? $75,000 a year?) looking at a paltry two weeks of revenue in exchange for disparagement clause. Seems completely out of whack with his beliefs and the amount being offered.
- mathattack 13y ago
  And frequently the # is negotiable, though it can require a lawyer to do the negotiating. Some work on contingency. (I've never been through the process, but have seen enough layoffs to have watched people negotiate their #s)

ujsfdo 13y ago

Whoop! Whoop! Dat's the sound of da police!

mistakoala 13y ago

Just wondering - particularly as I have no experience of the US employment market - but is it common for soon-to-be employees to negotiate a standard severance package into their contract of employment?

genwin 13y ago
No, not in my experience anyway.