3 ms·

It's also illegal to require employees to use their own devices and not compensate them for that use.

by lquist 12y ago

codezero 12y ago
Is that actually illegal? I think it's really crappy, and no company should do it, but I'd love to see where this is codified as illegal.
- vonklaus 12y ago
  it is unclear. I read an article yesterday saying California had just passed legislation to compensate for it. Obviously, it is pretty unethical, especially if you spend the majority of the day on the phone.
  - codezero 12y ago
    Yep, agree, very unethical, very hostile. Where did you read about the legislation passed?
    - vonklaus 12y ago
      Hacker News I beleive. I will find a link and post in a few minutes. One link here: http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/338164/employment+litigation+tribunals/California+Appellate+Court+Tells+Employers+to+Pay+Part+of+Employees+Cell+Phone+Bills+or+Face+Class+Action+Liability http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/338164/employment+litig... Edit 2: It was actually on Reddit. This is the link to Reddit commenting on the computer world article focusing on the same ruling at the appellate level: http://www.reddit.com/r/law/comments/2f55j2/california_cellphone_ruling_poses_big/ http://www.reddit.com/r/law/comments/2f55j2/california_cellp...
      - codezero 12y ago
        Thanks a bunch, great stuff.
- jfim 12y ago
  California passed a law about that I believe. An excerpt from this [1]: Section 2802 of the California Labor Code requires employers to reimburse employees for expenses “necessarily incurred” with the stated purpose of “prevent[ing] employers from passing their operating expenses on to their employees.” Lest anyone think this issue can be resolved with a waiver of the right to reimbursement, Labor Code section 2804 prohibits waivers of an employee’s rights to reimbursement. [1] http://www.dlapiper.com/en/us/insights/publications/2014/08/bring-your-own-device/ http://www.dlapiper.com/en/us/insights/publications/2014/08/...
  - codezero 12y ago
    Awesome, thanks!
rdtsc 12y ago
It might be illegal but it could be made "legal" if she contractually agreed to it somehow. As in "you provide us with a work sample, this day is an interview day, you are not an employee, yadda, yadda... <sign here>" It seems for the millions in VC funds they probably spent some attorneys who check that out for them.
- cdcarter 12y ago
  An individual's contract cannot not invalidate prevailing labor law or collective bargaining agreement. If you do actual work for the company on an interview day, you can sue for unpaid wages.
  - rdtsc 12y ago
    "do actual work" can be re-interpreted by sleazy lawyering in many ways. I've had some companies ask me to implement small snippets of code (QuadTree in C++ type stuff) as part of an interview process. Do I have chance of billing them for my time? The difference between "work" and "work sample for interview purposes" can be muddled that was the point.

It's also illegal to require employees to use their own devices and not compensate them for that use.

by lquist 12y ago

It's also illegal to require employees to use their own devices and not compensate them for that use.

Is that actually illegal? I think it's really crappy, and no company should do it, but I'd love to see where this is codified as illegal.

vonklaus 12y ago
it is unclear. I read an article yesterday saying California had just passed legislation to compensate for it. Obviously, it is pretty unethical, especially if you spend the majority of the day on the phone.
- codezero 12y ago
  Yep, agree, very unethical, very hostile. Where did you read about the legislation passed?
  - vonklaus 12y ago
    Hacker News I beleive. I will find a link and post in a few minutes. One link here: http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/338164/employment+litigation+tribunals/California+Appellate+Court+Tells+Employers+to+Pay+Part+of+Employees+Cell+Phone+Bills+or+Face+Class+Action+Liability http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/338164/employment+litig... Edit 2: It was actually on Reddit. This is the link to Reddit commenting on the computer world article focusing on the same ruling at the appellate level: http://www.reddit.com/r/law/comments/2f55j2/california_cellphone_ruling_poses_big/ http://www.reddit.com/r/law/comments/2f55j2/california_cellp...
    - codezero 12y ago
      Thanks a bunch, great stuff.
jfim 12y ago
California passed a law about that I believe. An excerpt from this [1]: Section 2802 of the California Labor Code requires employers to reimburse employees for expenses “necessarily incurred” with the stated purpose of “prevent[ing] employers from passing their operating expenses on to their employees.” Lest anyone think this issue can be resolved with a waiver of the right to reimbursement, Labor Code section 2804 prohibits waivers of an employee’s rights to reimbursement. [1] http://www.dlapiper.com/en/us/insights/publications/2014/08/bring-your-own-device/ http://www.dlapiper.com/en/us/insights/publications/2014/08/...
- codezero 12y ago
  Awesome, thanks!

rdtsc 12y ago

It might be illegal but it could be made "legal" if she contractually agreed to it somehow. As in "you provide us with a work sample, this day is an interview day, you are not an employee, yadda, yadda... <sign here>" It seems for the millions in VC funds they probably spent some attorneys who check that out for them.

cdcarter 12y ago
An individual's contract cannot not invalidate prevailing labor law or collective bargaining agreement. If you do actual work for the company on an interview day, you can sue for unpaid wages.
- rdtsc 12y ago
  "do actual work" can be re-interpreted by sleazy lawyering in many ways. I've had some companies ask me to implement small snippets of code (QuadTree in C++ type stuff) as part of an interview process. Do I have chance of billing them for my time? The difference between "work" and "work sample for interview purposes" can be muddled that was the point.