|
Parallelwoody posted:when I read their contract it wanted me to sign over power of attorney  
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 00:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 11:36 |
|
|
Power of attorney, uhhh what the gently caress Dr Evil corporation you be working for JFC
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 01:01
|
|
|
Fwiw the best HR people I've ever met were very honest with me about processes and outcomes, not just towing (toeing?) the company line. Sometimes poo poo is what it is, but no need to blow smoke up my arse That being said, nobody has ever asked me to sign over power of attorney lmao
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 01:04
|
|
|
Chewbecca posted:Fwiw the best HR people I've ever met were very honest with me about processes and outcomes, not just towing (toeing?) the company line. Toeing. As in, putting your toe right up against the line but not going over, nyah, I'm not on your side of the line, see?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 01:13
|
|
|
If they were trying to trick you into signing a POA that's really illegal. I hope you mean something else.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 01:48
|
|
|
Power of attorney for inventions made while working for a company is pretty depressingly standard poo poo. I've had to do it when working retail for Games Workshop in the long, long ago, and come across it in IT roles to cover poo poo like "automation scripts" or whatever and prevent you just taking a pile of code with you when you leave. It's absolute bullshit for companies to even think they can detect that stuff, let alone track or enforce it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 02:36
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:Power of attorney for inventions made while working for a company is pretty depressingly standard poo poo. I've had to do it when working retail for Games Workshop in the long, long ago, and come across it in IT roles to cover poo poo like "automation scripts" or whatever and prevent you just taking a pile of code with you when you leave. It's absolute bullshit for companies to even think they can detect that stuff, let alone track or enforce it. Yeah it was this. I wasn't actually worried about it (also didn't sign it) but I did take inspiration from this thread to say "Hey this poo poo isn't standard and we have now reopened negotiations if this is required."
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 03:12
|
|
|
You agree by working here that the company is now your attorney, your next of kin, and your spouse.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 03:49
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:You agree by working here that the company is now your attorney, your next of kin, and your spouse. jokes on them, I'm a liability
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 03:52
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:You agree by working here that the company is now your attorney, your next of kin, and your spouse. That doesn't make sense, the company will actually gently caress me 
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 03:58
|
|
|
Parallelwoody posted:That doesn't make sense, the company will actually gently caress me
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 04:43
|
|
|
Parallelwoody posted:Yeah it was this. I wasn't actually worried about it (also didn't sign it) but I did take inspiration from this thread to say "Hey this poo poo isn't standard and we have now reopened negotiations if this is required."
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 04:46
|
|
|
Man I'm glad I have a union with a legal department that basically does nothing but read bullshit contracts and point out the flaws to me. Standard procedure is sending them the proposed contract, then they call in a few days and tell me what parts are bullshit. In my last contract, the wording was that the company owned any IP I made. Luckily that was just because the company downloaded a template so I got it removed. Also they took out the wording about me providing my own car, but that was more of a soft warning from the union I think.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 09:00
|
|
|
As expected HR drone had no range or anything and the meeting was entirely useless. He's gonna take my ask and see what he can come back with, I expect them to try and lowball me on it next. I'll tell them that i wasn't asking to negotiate but telling, we'll go from there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 19:30
|
|
|
It'd be pretty funny to find out what the margin your contractor company was making on you is and go "you don't have to pay them that now, give it to me" and watch them refuse anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 20:06
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:It'd be pretty funny to find out what the margin your contractor company was making on you is and go "you don't have to pay them that now, give it to me" and watch them refuse anyway. That's actually common. The company pays a premium to the contractor company to handle payroll taxes, the sad benefit package they may offer, overhead, etc. I've worked with several people that started out contractors who took a small paycut to transition over to a FTE. Overall comp goes way up with the benefit package, PTO, etc, but hourly rate was a small decrease. A FTE generally costs the company about 30% to 40% more than their base cash salary. That's without getting into all the political bs at the corp level of expanding headcount. A previous org we could hire contractors all we wanted but we weren't getting an FTE spot for any reason.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 20:42
|
|
|
I'm out of work in tech and have been since November. I just got a 'not an offer' offer, from the recruiter who is not at an agency, he works for the actual company. He called me and said "you're going to get an offer and this is what we're sort of thinking of" Note, I blew away all of the interviewers as far as I can tell, in my three rounds of interviews (about an hour each). Previously he said the role was for mid level but I'm obviously a senior, and the salary is X and they'd try to get it bumped up by 20k but that would mean a lot of approvals, all the way up the chain. Today they said "we're going to give you an offer, remember this is a mid level role, and the salary is, IDK what I previously said but it's X+5k. Remember there's a bonus every year of 15%! But you're a senior and this is mid level, so, yeah, we don't want to give you something bad" I asked, when does the bonus happen and how often does it happen. he said it's annually at the end of q1 and if I started this month 'obviously I wouldn't get it', so I made some sad noises and said, "look, honestly my salary at my last job was X + 24k. But just make me a good offer!" I have no other irons in the fire right now and I'm hoping that they don't get turned off or whatever? IDK? At this point I will accept pretty much anything since I don't actually have a job, and I hope I didn't make them think that if they offer me a job I'll leave as soon as I get a higher salary. But yeah if they offer me a really low salary (like X+5k) I will in fact be doing that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 20:54
|
|
|
skipdogg posted:That's actually common. The company pays a premium to the contractor company to handle payroll taxes, the sad benefit package they may offer, overhead, etc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 20:58
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:There should still be some margin in it for the contractor org or else they wouldn't be doing the job at all, and basically that's what the drive to in-house them is aiming to cut out to save money with. TBH though with the bullshit clause all of my suggestions amount to trolling them in return. Quite more so even, keep in mind that both companies are part of the same corp. Because of this <contracting agency> charges <actual company> all expenses 1:1 + contracting fee. There's no small margins, they get everything reimbursed directly and a percentage on top. It's quite substantial, which is among the reasons <actual company> is going away from that model. If I'd be able to take home the contracting cut I'd be swimming in money, but that's not realistic at all. Should have asked for that tho, drat. "Just gimme whatever you gave <contracting agency>".
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 21:09
|
|
|
redreader posted:I'm out of work in tech and have been since November. I just got a 'not an offer' offer, from the recruiter who is not at an agency, he works for the actual company. He called me and said "you're going to get an offer and this is what we're sort of thinking of" Note, I blew away all of the interviewers as far as I can tell, in my three rounds of interviews (about an hour each). Nothing you said should turn them away but also you sound like you're not really negotiating since your BATNA blows so just keep your mouth shut and let them give you an offer and you can see if you think it's wise to counter or not. "I know I am a senior but I applied for a mid-level role" is not the best negotiating standpoint but it also sounds (if I am reading correctly) that the recruiter is trying to be transparent which is a good sign.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 21:51
|
|
|
Do you work in an industry where leaving this job after a month would burn too many bridges? If not accept the job regardless and keep looking for something better. Don’t even put the new job on your resume.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2024 23:56
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:Do you work in an industry where leaving this job after a month would burn too many bridges? If not accept the job regardless and keep looking for something better. Don’t even put the new job on your resume. It's tech so not really. I'd piss off my friend who got me the job, but the tech market is so bad right now that I think I just need to take what I get and like it. I suspect that even if I keep looking I won't find anything soon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2024 01:19
|
|
|
i briefly worked for a contractor company and one of the HR employees accidentally let slip that while i was making something like $20/hr, client was paying $40/hr. (not in the US) it's pretty insane. makes me wonder why clients wouldn't just poach good contractors. happier employee, happier company.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 17:35
|
|
|
at least in the US there's a slice of payroll taxes and benefits costs that mean you definitely wouldn't be seeing $40 an hour
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 17:43
|
|
|
marumaru posted:i briefly worked for a contractor company and one of the HR employees accidentally let slip that while i was making something like $20/hr, client was paying $40/hr. (not in the US) Companies who are hiring contractors know that they're paying more per hour than a full time employee would cost. They do it because they don't need somebody permanently, don't need somebody full-time, need expertise that they don't already have in-house, need somebody faster than they could do a full job search, or any number of other reasons.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 17:43
|
|
|
Muir posted:Companies who are hiring contractors know that they're paying more per hour than a full time employee would cost. They do it because they don't need somebody permanently, don't need somebody full-time, need expertise that they don't already have in-house, need somebody faster than they could do a full job search, or any number of other reasons. i get most of those, but at least for this (very large) contracting org the "they don't need somebody permanently" and "don't need somebody full-time" arguments don't apply, since they pretty much only do full-time long-term contracts. like, whoever wasn't a new hire had been assigned to the same companies for several years. it has to be some tax thing, because within those timeframes they could surely do normal recruiting?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 17:54
|
|
|
Yeah that's... Kind of the whole point of hiring contractors. Or temporary employees (temps) I was temp to hire at my first full time job, I was making $10/hr as a contractor and got a raise to $12/hr when I went full time because they were paying the contractor $20 and with benefits (we had a pretty good 401k match) the total cost to the company was $20/hr The latest trend with startups trying to stretch their dollars until interest rates get better is to replace any workers with off shore contractors, then when borrowing costs drop again, ditch the contractors in favor of on shore labor again
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 17:54
|
|
|
Another company I was at, they had spun up a software engineering division and had initially started with contractors just to get experienced people in the door, fast. Most of those contractors were paid pretty well and they didn't get around to hiring FTE until year 16 of the division (shortly before I joined). Anybody who worked in that division was a contractor because of, basically inertia, and employee salary of regular workers wasn't really tied to all the money they were making and converting 150 contractors to being regular employees wasn't a priority for them The company my wife worked for, practically a government protected monopoly, to reduce risk to the company, basically 95% of the company's actual work and business functions were farmed out to contractors, and the people who actually worked at the company mostly existed to manage the contractors, who then had their own subcontractor head count
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 18:03
|
|
|
marumaru posted:i get most of those, but at least for this (very large) contracting org the "they don't need somebody permanently" and "don't need somebody full-time" arguments don't apply, since they pretty much only do full-time long-term contracts. like, whoever wasn't a new hire had been assigned to the same companies for several years. it has to be some tax thing, because within those timeframes they could surely do normal recruiting? Its for a bunch of different reasons but yes, the company paying the contract is almost always losing dollars vs just hiring full time. But those reasons are: 1. They don't want to carry FTE liabilities on their spreadsheets (this is huge for companies in certain phases of M&A or want to be in certain phases) 2. Recruiting is a lot harder and more expensive than you think. If you need people, it can be much faster and even cheaper short term to pay a contractor more. 3. A company may not know what they want, so they want to bring in people to "test run". 4. In a long enough run a company can build a relationship where the margins can get thin enough that it's a rounding error in cost. Probably not your case with a 100% markup (which isn't unusual) but I've seen a company where they hired THOUSANDS of these people from a contractor a year and the markup was small enough and the volume was large enough everyone won (actual people doing the work excluded). Hadlock posted:Anybody who worked in that division was a contractor because of, basically inertia, and employee salary of regular workers wasn't really tied to all the money they were making and converting 150 contractors to being regular employees wasn't a priority for them This is a big one. Sometimes you have to start with contracting and then you have a system that's working and people are happy and productive so why change it? When you talk about bottom line expense sometimes it's worth more to spend extra than risk shaking everything up, at least for a time. Lockback fucked around with this message at 18:36 on Feb 26, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 18:04
|
|
|
Another thing I've seen at mega corps that do a lot of contracting is the question of which/whose budget is it coming out of. A particular project, even if it will run for years, might have its own budget under some org that is not the same budget/org as FTEs. And that can make it easier or less onerous, not necessarily cheaper, to hire a bunch of contractors for a project rather than trying to staff up internally. When I did a bunch of contracting/consulting we were not cheap but we were often brought in as an end-run around internal politics and budgeting and infighting that FTEs were subject to. Many megacorps have entire little ecosystems of contract shops that ride their coat tails around for getting work like this. It sounds silly and sometimes it absolutely is but that's corporate America for ya.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 18:53
|
|
|
I feel like my last temp-to-hire position (not quite the same, I guess), they seemed offended when I said I wanted to be hired in at least at the same rate I was making as a contractor. In hindsight it was poorly managed from all sides. I didn’t even get offered the job despite having been, you know, doing the job for a while.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 20:54
|
|
|
I work in HR consulting at a rate of $40 and know I get billed out between $100-120 an hour depending on the client. I don't think there's any additional reasons that haven't already been covered by others, but yeah there's a lot of factors that come into play besides the direct cost. Benefits themselves can add a substantial amount of cost to an FTE.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 21:02
|
|
|
redreader posted:I'm out of work in tech and have been since November. I just got a 'not an offer' offer, from the recruiter who is not at an agency, he works for the actual company. He called me and said "you're going to get an offer and this is what we're sort of thinking of" Note, I blew away all of the interviewers as far as I can tell, in my three rounds of interviews (about an hour each). The phone call was on Thursday afternoon saying "we're going to give you an offer!". My friend at the company said that on Friday during standup, my future (?) manager said he was talking to the recruiter about my offer, and to tell me that 'they're going to extend an offer to me'. It's Monday afternoon and I haven't heard anything yet. I'm wondering if this is still a normal amount of time to be waiting. They haven't interviewed anyone else for the job, and I feel like I should be relaxing saying 'I'm about to get an offer' but instead I'm not. Is this a normal amount of time to be waiting? I'm sure it is, I just feel like it's not.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 22:19
|
|
|
redreader posted:The phone call was on Thursday afternoon saying "we're going to give you an offer!". My friend at the company said that on Friday during standup, my future (?) manager said he was talking to the recruiter about my offer, and to tell me that 'they're going to extend an offer to me'. It's Monday afternoon and I haven't heard anything yet. I'm wondering if this is still a normal amount of time to be waiting. They haven't interviewed anyone else for the job, and I feel like I should be relaxing saying 'I'm about to get an offer' but instead I'm not. Is this a normal amount of time to be waiting? I'm sure it is, I just feel like it's not. There’s a million possible mundane bureaucratic reasons it might be taking a while, you have direct communication that the offer is coming, this sounds extremely normal. Congrats on the future offer, hope it is good!
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 23:14
|
|
|
redreader posted:The phone call was on Thursday afternoon saying "we're going to give you an offer!". My friend at the company said that on Friday during standup, my future (?) manager said he was talking to the recruiter about my offer, and to tell me that 'they're going to extend an offer to me'. It's Monday afternoon and I haven't heard anything yet. I'm wondering if this is still a normal amount of time to be waiting. They haven't interviewed anyone else for the job, and I feel like I should be relaxing saying 'I'm about to get an offer' but instead I'm not. Is this a normal amount of time to be waiting? I'm sure it is, I just feel like it's not. Thursday --> Monday with no offer is perfectly normal. A billion people probably have to sign off for the offer, and all it takes is one dude being OOO / leaving early on Friday and whoopsie, can't get it out on time. I have no idea what's too long (it took my last employer 3 months from "here comes an offer" to "actual offer received via encrypted system"), but I can definitely say Thurs-->Mon is not a panic-worthy amount of time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 23:14
|
|
|
Any number of things can come up. The hiring managers wife could have gotten in a car accident over the weekend, the lady in HR that acts as the unnecessary go between could have broken up with her boyfriend and isn't answering the phone because she's superstitious, or maybe they're like our office and we just changed offices and the VPN is acting up and nobody is getting any work done today. Or maybe the recruiter went on their ski vacation, forgot to forward the paperwork and it won't get filled until Thursday 
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 23:15
|
|
|
I'd say maybe follow up if you don't hear after 5 business days. As noted, there are a million reasons for delays, none of them related to you If you want to email earlier because you feel antsy (totally understandable), you could write an email asking for links to relevant documents so you can 'prepare for your start date', then asking 'speaking of which, when can I expect to receive a letter of offer'?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2024 23:40
|
|
|
Sundae posted:
i do: i got an offer 1.5yr after a [single] interview with this one company i had to go a search in my email to see if it was just some weaksauce spam.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2024 10:27
|
|
|
marumaru posted:i do: i got an offer 1.5yr after a [single] interview with this one company We all got laid off on Nov 1 2023. One guy from QA had joined in the start of 2023. The week we got laid off, he got a call from a place he'd interviewed at in January saying that they want him and he doesn't have to interview again. He started a couple of days later!
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2024 18:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 11:36 |
|
|
redreader posted:I'm out of work in tech and have been since November. I just got a 'not an offer' offer, from the recruiter who is not at an agency, he works for the actual company. He called me and said "you're going to get an offer and this is what we're sort of thinking of" Note, I blew away all of the interviewers as far as I can tell, in my three rounds of interviews (about an hour each). Ok, I heard back. They had approval for $X for the role and are trying to get me more money than $X. They submitted the request to get the position altered to be a better one with more money, and it's currently waiting for approval. I suppose this could go either way now: I get the job with more money than they originally offered, or they get refused in which case ???? Either they'll offer me the original amount or they'll decide I'm too senior for the position. It could still blow up in my face! edit: also the finance team is on a business trip for the week so the approval (or denial?) is taking longer than expected but my future manager is following up with them every day. redreader fucked around with this message at 18:58 on Feb 28, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2024 17:22
|
|