On Wed, March 23, 2005 9:45 am, James Brigman said: > Marc; > > [ Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. This posting is not legal advice. ] > > A job offer is normally a joyous event. You don't sound very > overjoyed. > If someone's offering you a job and you feel the need to consult a > labor > lawyer, something's wrong here. Think about what that means to you. > > A labor lawyer with the knowledge you seek would cost you more than > $200 > to have some kind of letter drafted, more than $1000 to keep a lawyer > on > retainer and more than $1500 for you to be represented by that lawyer > to > a potential employer. Show up with a lawyer to meet with a potential > employer and watch them run faster than you can say "E Pluribus Unum". > Instantly, you've got no job offer AND you've lost some of your own > cash. > > Focus on where you are now, and where you want to be in the future: > Are > you currently employed and have the option to "do nothing"? Do you > have > other opportunities? How important is this job to you? What does it > mean > for your career in the long term? > > If you took the job, do you think you might have to fight against > increased control and regulation in the future? "Be here by 8:05am or > you will be written up", "Chewing gum in the conference rooms will get > you written up", and "Parking in the reserved spaces will get you > written up". How productive can you be if your 'nads are kept in a > glass jar on a shelf in the HR dept? How happy are you going to be at > <TOYCO> with this lingering fear? > > What benefits are being offered in return for this control? Are they > offering an extremely high pay rate? Is there special training you > can't > get elsewhere? Sending you to USENIX for free? Offering free RHEL > certification? You've talked about their attempts to take away from > you > - what is it they are offering in return? Every employment situation > is > a combination of restrictions and benefits which suit the employer and > the employee. Focus on these and weigh how successful you can be under > these conditions. > > If you are being represented by a contracting or headhunting firm, > talk > to them about this document. It is in their best interest for you to > take the job. They may not even be aware of the document and might > help > you work through the issue successfully. They may have lost previous > candidates due to this form and might be eager to work through it. > > Be mindful of WHO is asking you to sign this document. Many HR > departments have been dismantled in the past decade, mostly outsourced > or changed out with people who may be ignorant of the law. Much "brain > trust" has been lost. Was this document written by some 20 year old HR > chick (or rooster) who got the job based on TANDA? The headhunting > firm > or hiring manager may have no clue this document has been placed into > the mix, and the writer of the document might just be a kid who > doesn't > know any better. > > And if you are, in fact, expected to sign such a document as a > condition > of employment, Jon Carnes advice is good: counter-propose another > document. I'd change the document and remove the offending verbage, > and > in fact I'd try to write it to my own advantage. I wouldn't simply > give > the "If you want me to sign this, I'm walking." answer. Don't bring > "walking off" to the table just yet. Ask them why they would propose > such a document and if, in fact, they've had to worry about the > "problems" it tries to "protect" the company from. And know in your > heart that there are probably people now working for the company who > did > not sign such a document. > > Many companies do ask potential employees to sign a document > indicating > that the work they do on company time belongs to the employer, which > is > a reasonable expectation. Only people like Linus Torvalds get the > sweet > deals where they get paid by an employer but get to develop Open > Source > for the rest of the world. > > A reasonable document would say something that includes only work done > on the job, but says nothing about work done off the job and removes > the > "in perpetuity" concept. Trying to own things written after employment > is difficult, and the former employer would have to show duplication > of > something uniquely available at the company. If this were an > enforceable > contract element, AMD would not be doing Intel-compatible processors > today. > > Remember the old adage about "Offering your manager three options"? > Well, one clear option is to walk away. You always have that option. A > second option is to sign the document and take the job. A third option > might be to rewrite the document to something acceptable and throw the > ball back into their court. Sometimes, where ego is involved, it's > just > about signing the form, not necessarily about what's on the form. :-) > > One last thing: TAKE YOUR TIME playing the game. There are elements of > Poker in all hiring negotiations. Your leverage increases with time, > not > decreases. Negotiation is an intricate balance of terms, a "ballet" > that > you dance with the employer to secure conditions of benefit to you > both. > The only people with fire in their pants are the people who need to > get > paid off your labor. > > Hang in there man: it's to the benefit of TriLUG for our members to be > gainfully employed in positions they enjoy. We're all rooting for you, > just understand that you're the one driving the boat - we're all just > spectators. > > JKB >
James, Well written! Thanks for taking the time as this advice I am sure benefits all Triluggers at some point. Matt -- TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug TriLUG Organizational FAQ : http://trilug.org/faq/ TriLUG Member Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/ TriLUG PGP Keyring : http://trilug.org/~chrish/trilug.asc
