|
Rhesus Pieces posted:Right, which is why I'm baffled that these are being thrown at low-level workers to begin with. I can't see a legitimate reason for these to exist in such cases except to be used selectively against certain workers for retaliatory purposes. It is so they can gently caress workers who don't know better, like 99% of things that impact poor people.
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 09:56 |
|
|
I thought the Amazon warehouse workers sued due to that clause in their contract and the whole thing was found to be unenforceable. But I guess not. drat.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
Boywhiz88 posted:I thought the Amazon warehouse workers sued due to that clause in their contract and the whole thing was found to be unenforceable. But I guess not. drat. Probably in California. In any event, unenforceable doesn't mean poo poo until you get sued, hire a lawyer, and win which detera low wage workers from leaving for a $1 and hour plus less sexual harrassment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 21:32
|
|
|
Rhesus Pieces posted:Right, which is why I'm baffled that these are being thrown at low-level workers to begin with. I can't see a legitimate reason for these to exist in such cases except to be used selectively against certain workers for retaliatory purposes. It's only an empty threat if the worker knows enough about labour laws to know its bullshit, which they likely do not. Not to mention the costs of litigation as the above posts mention.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 21:32
|
|
|
Rhesus Pieces posted:Right, which is why I'm baffled that these are being thrown at low-level workers to begin with. I can't see a legitimate reason for these to exist in such cases except to be used selectively against certain workers for retaliatory purposes. They're being thrown in in most cases because that company has proper non-compete clauses that make sense for high level employees that actually have legit useful knowledge you might seek to protect. Like, say, at a fast food place, a it would make sense for some six figure making lead food researcher/chef sort of person who's responsible for coming up with new menu items and has access to proposed new menu items. Because if they jumped ship to a competitor they could scoop the original company. Then for whatever reason some higher up dude demands the non-compete clause be brought to all their workers, and so some cashier who has no particular important knowledge for a competitor is subject to it too. Boywhiz88 posted:I thought the Amazon warehouse workers sued due to that clause in their contract and the whole thing was found to be unenforceable. But I guess not. drat. A ton of non-compete clauses that get put in contracts are poorly written and not actually enforceable, as the scope of what can be enforced is pretty narrow. MiddleOne posted:It's only an empty threat if the worker knows enough about labour laws to know its bullshit, which they likely do not. Not to mention the costs of litigation as the above posts mention. Yeah but on the other hand the ones that apply to low level workers in like a warehouse or fast food are just going to get ignored by the person who got fired.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 22:06
|
|
|
It's not about protecting IP, it's about making your employee dependent on their job and unable to work elsewhere which drives down churn and depresses wages.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:It's not about protecting IP, it's about making your employee dependent on their job and unable to work elsewhere which drives down churn and depresses wages. Yup, and companies don't even have to go after every employee who jumps ship. Just make an example of one and the rest will know they aren't bluffing. Here's the article on this I was looking for: quote:Keith Bollinger’s paycheck as a factory manager had shriveled after the 2008 financial crisis, but then he got a chance to pull himself out of recession’s hole. A rival textile company offered him a better job — and a big raise. I don't think this is just company legal departments being lazy or throwing the clauses into all new contracts for the hell of it. It looks like they're testing the boundaries of what they can get away with to see if they can make this poo poo "the new normal."
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:It's not about protecting IP, it's about making your employee dependent on their job and unable to work elsewhere which drives down churn and depresses wages. Yeah for IP protection it's a non-disclosure about trade secrets etc. I think I'm technically still under one of those  but it basically means I can't tell anyone about how x product was made, which is pretty fair really.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 22:55
|
|
|
nm posted:It is so they can gently caress workers who don't know better, like 99% of things that impact poor people. There are also a hell of a lot of poor people just plain desperate for a job - any loving job at all - that they'd probably sign away their first born if it meant making $9/hour. As soon as the Great Recession hit and millions of jobs evaporated a hell of a lot of American companies really took the thumbscrews as hard as they possibly could to unskilled workers. Now that things are actually picking up a bit they're trying their damnedest to keep the screws tight.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 22:57
|
|
|
Having been involved in the crafting of these contracts, I think 99% of the time for startups at least it literally comes down to there being extra cost and no upside whatsoever for companies to have different contracts for low-level employees vs. executives. You won't get in trouble for demanding someone's first born son in a contract, it's just not enforceable, it's extra effort to make and especially track multiple versions, and then you need to worry about things like "what if a low level person gets promoted to the point where a non-compete is legitimate?" The same thing happens with literally every business contract - whoever initially proposes asks for the moon and it's whittled down. The only problem is for employment contracts specifically the new candidate usually doesn't have the knowledge, resources or power to do any real negotiation. I don't want to downplay the shittiness of it, but it's absolutely done out of laziness / cost control than any malicious intent. enki42 fucked around with this message at 23:25 on Jun 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
Non-competes should only be legal if a company is willing to pay either your former salary or your prospective new one (the higher of the two) for the duration they prevent you from working. Want to keep someone off the market? Fine, but you gotta pay up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 23:28
|
|
|
You would think lawyers would be making a killing on contingency for some of these iffy non-compete contracts.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 23:36
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:You would think lawyers would be making a killing on contingency for some of these iffy non-compete contracts. Eh there's not a lot of penalty judgements to extract out of them when they're really stupid, like fast food cashier non-competes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 23:46
|
|
|
enki42 posted:I don't want to downplay the shittiness of it, but it's absolutely done out of laziness / cost control than any malicious intent. If the non-compete is not only unlawful, but the employer asserts that it is anyway, then perhaps there could be an explicit penalty of sorts.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 00:57
|
|
|
enki42 posted:Having been involved in the crafting of these contracts, I think 99% of the time for startups at least it literally comes down to there being extra cost and no upside whatsoever for companies to have different contracts for low-level employees vs. executives. You won't get in trouble for demanding someone's first born son in a contract, it's just not enforceable, it's extra effort to make and especially track multiple versions, and then you need to worry about things like "what if a low level person gets promoted to the point where a non-compete is legitimate?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 01:53
|
|
|
Rhesus Pieces posted:Right, which is why I'm baffled that these are being thrown at low-level workers to begin with. I can't see a legitimate reason for these to exist in such cases except to be used selectively against certain workers for retaliatory purposes. Yeah it's solely a "gently caress you" provision. Because of course the workers could always just not sign or negotiate so it's not burdensome 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 03:13
|
|
|
Uber, when your company starts to crack, don't try plugging those cracks with the ever-growing stack of court orders. Uber rape victim sues Uber, says execs got her medical records quote:Doe's new complaint (PDF) says that Eric Alexander, Uber's then-vice president for business in Asia, went to Delhi and "managed to obtain Plaintiff's confidential, private medical records generated by physicians who examined her after the brutal rape."
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 22:37
|
|
|
Rhesus Pieces posted:Right, which is why I'm baffled that these are being thrown at low-level workers to begin with. I can't see a legitimate reason for these to exist in such cases except to be used selectively against certain workers for retaliatory purposes. that's a chilling thought, because fyi that's how laws work in police states
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:that's a chilling thought, because fyi that's how laws work in police states quote:AARON MATÉ: Now, you spent time with the—with the poor and vulnerable and people of color, who have been targeted by this system. There was one case of a man in New York, who lives in Bed-Stuy, standing outside of his home who was arrested. Can you take it from there? It's arguable that traffic laws work the same way, in that there are so many on the books that almost every driver technically breaks a few every time they travel from point A to B. If a cop wants to pull you over to search your car or harass you in some way all he has to do is follow you for a few blocks and you're almost guaranteed to give him a reason to stop you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 16:34
|
|
|
axeil posted:Yeah it's solely a "gently caress you" provision. Because of course the workers could always just not sign or negotiate so it's not burdensome Yep, and it's being justified as protecting trade secrets or some crap even though most of those industries don't really have such things. Also the numbers are staggering quote:Yet Starr’s survey research suggests that tweaking the criteria may have a limited effect on how often the agreements are signed. In California, where noncompete agreements can’t be enforced, 19 percent of workers have signed one, he said. In Florida, where the agreements are easily enforced, the share is the same: 19 percent. 19% is an insane number of people with non-competes, especially since they are places like Jimmy Johns or home health care agencies. https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2017/05/27/noncompete-clauses-jobs-workplace/348384001/
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
Amazon buys Whole Foods for $13.7 billion.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/matthewstoller/status/875711786028347396 lol holy poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
the whole company was almost named relentless
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
This is essentially Amazon's business plan, has been for a while, and the only question is whether they run out of money before they establish their monopoly on all commerce.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Does Amazon qualify as a Zaibatsu at this point?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
Swipe right for science: Papr app is ‘Tinder for preprints’ Look, I just wanted to post that name here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 22:15
|
|
|
Just in case the previous posts weren't clear enough: https://whois.icann.org/en/lookup?name=relentless.com Contact Information Registrant Contact Name: Hostmaster, Amazon Legal Dept. Organization: Amazon Technologies, Inc. Mailing Address: P.O. Box 8102, Reno NV 89507 US Phone: +1.2062664064 Ext: Fax: +1.2062667010 Fax Ext: Email:hostmaster@amazon.com Admin Contact Name: Hostmaster, Amazon Legal Dept. Organization: Amazon Technologies, Inc. Mailing Address: P.O. Box 8102, Reno NV 89507 US Phone: +1.2062664064 Ext: Fax: +1.2062667010 Fax Ext: Email:hostmaster@amazon.com Tech Contact Name: Hostmaster, Amazon Legal Dept. Organization: Amazon Technologies, Inc. Mailing Address: P.O. Box 8102, Reno NV 89507 US Phone: +1.2062664064 Ext: Fax: +1.2062667010 Fax Ext: Email:hostmaster@amazon.com
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 00:50
|
|
|
Baby Babbeh posted:This is essentially Amazon's business plan, has been for a while, and the only question is whether they run out of money before they establish their monopoly on all commerce. Uh, I don't think Amazon is in danger of running out of money any time soon. Or am I misreading this? Edit: Also, remember those Amazon boxes they were touting a few years ago? This would be a good way to buy footprint in a ton of urban areas to place those. Lots of efficiencies if you reimagine the Whole Foods as a local distribution center rather than as a grocery store that does delivery.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
Kind of. It's just saying that they are expanding to take over all of commerce and only total, catastrophic bankruptcy will stop them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 00:58
|
|
|
An economic event severe enough to bankrupt Amazon will leave us not caring what happens to Amazon. An anti-trust action is (barely) more likely.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 01:55
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:An economic event severe enough to bankrupt Amazon will leave us not caring what happens to Amazon. It's more likely in Europe than in the US.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 02:47
|
|
|
Sign up for prime and get a mystery box full of discount rack produce each month shipped to your house.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:Sign up for prime and get a mystery box full of discount rack produce each month shipped to your house. Will it be rotting like spud.ca
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 03:34
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:Swipe right for science: Papr app is ‘Tinder for preprints’ Good christ, as if the current prepub systems weren't corrupt and abused enough.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 05:38
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Good christ, as if the current prepub systems weren't corrupt and abused enough. *tucks self in bed* Tell me a story about that, Uncle Vox! 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 05:40
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:*tucks self in bed* Tell me a story about that, Uncle Vox! Same. Way too keyed up over a video game, please let's hear about corruption in academic presses.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 05:45
|
|
|
Sometime when I'm not several days behind on a writing project, sorry. I was more referring to user system abuses of citation, productivity measures, and ArXiv, anyway.
Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 05:57 on Jun 17, 2017 |
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 05:54
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Sometime when I'm not several days behind on a writing project, sorry. I was more referring to user system abuses of citation and ArXiv, anyway. Oh, vixra fixed all of arxiv's problems.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 05:56
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Oh, vixra fixed all of arxiv's problems. 
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 05:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 09:56 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 05:58
|
|