Re: new blood

Paul Edwards

On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 04:46 AM, Joe Monk wrote:

Had you RTFA, you wouldve understood.
I read some of it. It's the usual whinging about
companies doing perfectly legal stuff that the
author doesn't like, but can't be bothered getting
some specific legislation passed to solve what
they consider to be a problem.

This is the free market. Not a dictatorship.
Right up until you walk thru that front door. For instance, here in Texas,
they dont need a reason to fire you. One minute youre employed, the next
minute youre in HR getting told your job has been eliminated. No reason
necessary or given.
And that gives Texan companies a competitive advantage,
which will attract companies to go to Texas and help the
people of Texas by providing more choice of employment.

And again - what are you proposing as an alternative?
Barriers to employing people because the company has
to go through government-imposed hoops?

Also, inside a company, the first amendment doesnt apply, because it
doesnt apply to companies, only to the government. So your employer can
fire you for social media, pretty much anything.
So start a company that prides itself in hiring anyone
regardless of how disgusting their political opinions
may be.

In fact, I'll do that right now.

Work for and you can feel free to say that
OS authors, or Skips in general, should be gassed,
with no ramifications whatsoever.

Ever had a non compete clause? I've got one in my employment agreement

"At the end of the Employment Period, by expiration or termination, the
Employee may not engage, own, manage, control, operate, be employed by,
participate in, or be connected with the ownership, management, operation,
or control of a business with the intention of directly or indirectly
competing with Company for a period of one year and within 35 miles from
the present location[s] of the Company’s business. If the Employee breaches
or threatens to breach this section, the Company will be entitled to a
preliminary restraining order and injunction preventing the Employee from
violating its provisions. Nothing in this agreement prohibits the Company
from pursuing any other available remedies for a breach or threatened
breach, including the recovery of damages from the Employee."
That's only 1 year, and only 35 miles. That doesn't sound
onerous to me, and anyway, if you don't like that rule, find
a different employer.

And what's your alternative anyway? The company is
putting that there to protect themselves, not for fun.
You can create legislation saying "no more than 6
months" or "no more than 2 km" if you want.

Would you like assistance in formulating the required
legislation to make America a better place to work?

BFN. Paul.

Join to automatically receive all group messages.