Welcome to America

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

A clause in the contract I signed with my employer states that I can be fired if I do anything that reflects badly on the company, whether it's done on my time or theirs. For example, if I make an inflammatory statement in front of a journalist, and they happen to mention who I work for, then I could be fired. The clause has been tested in court, and it was upheld.

The same contract also has an intellectual property clause that states that any invention I create while I am employed by the company, even if on my own time and using my own resources, is the property of the company. The only exception are inventions which are declared as my own at the time I am hired, or inventions which are unrelated to the business of the company. This clause has also been challenged in court, and it was also upheld.

The fact is that the company "owns you" to whatever degree you permit them to own you when you sign your employment contract.

I doubt they signed such a contract for a retail position, and catching a shoplifter certainly wouldn't reflect badly on the company if they weren't doing it for the store.

For instance, would your company fire you for stopping a guy on the street who is stealing a purse if its on your own personal time?

I get what your saying, but I'm betting it doesn't apply here. I assume these guys are looking into a wrongful termination suit.

[Heracles 417]

Seems pretty clear that these guys were justifiably terminated. Employment is an at-will endeavor that can be ended by either party at any time. You don't have a right to employment.

You condone American employers continuing the practice of firing people at will and with a minutes notice? A practice not legal in a number of first world countries.

It's not a matter of a right to employment but a matter of not treating employers as slaves. I wonder if those fired were minorities, then you'd be on there kicking and screaming about them.

[The_Dude 1,142]

You condone American employers continuing the practice of firing people at will and with a minutes notice? A practice not legal in a number of first world countries.

It's not a matter of a right to employment but a matter of not treating employers as slaves. I wonder if those fired were minorities, then you'd be on there kicking and screaming about them.

If those are the terms to which you agreed to when you took up employement, then you have to abide by them. I don't give a ** what excuse they give. If you can't be bothered to read your own contract, then you have bigger issues to deal with. I've negotiated my own contract several times. In my experience, just about everything is negotiable.

[Heracles 417]

If those are the terms to which you agreed to when you took up employement, then you have to abide by them. I don't give a ** what excuse they give. If you can't be bothered to read your own contract, then you have bigger issues to deal with. I've negotiated my own contract several times. In my experience, just about everything is negotiable.

People in retail jobs don't get to negotiate their contracts Rob. Thus, are protected by stated and federal laws abroad. There is no chance in hell someone can be fired for pursuing justice. This would warrant unfair dismissal and a hefty fine for the business. Then again over there, retail staff and so on receive sick leave, vacation leave and retirement (401k equivalent) on top of their $16 an hour wage. Basically they are not treated like ####### as they are here.

I remember seeing a news story a few months back in Chicago where neither the police nor the store did anything about a guy who was a regular thief at a CVS store. Because of such moronic policies.

[rsn 135]

If those are the terms to which you agreed to when you took up employement, then you have to abide by them. I don't give a ** what excuse they give. If you can't be bothered to read your own contract, then you have bigger issues to deal with. I've negotiated my own contract several times. In my experience, just about everything is negotiable.

Wouldn't you rather live in Australia where the govt protects people from themselves (unless you are a native citizen)? People in Australia don't have time to read contracts, they're too busy babbling about how much their country rocks! Yea Australia!

[Heracles 417]

Wouldn't you rather live in Australia where the govt protects people from themselves (unless you are a native citizen)? People in Australia don't have time to read contracts, they're too busy babbling about how much their country rocks! Yea Australia!

People? Try one person - me. Every now and then (maybe) one other comes on here but that's pretty-much all.

If you want to live in your little flyover world, then so be it. No need to even comment, unless it bothers you guitar boy...

Nevertheless, workers rights are heavily protected over there. You don't get to being ranked second best in the world for human development by international bodies by having US style slave laws. Strangely enough even with these laws, they not only have lower unemployment but earn way more on average. Lets not forget the mandated four weeks vacation time.

Edited April 29, 2010 by Booyah!

[The_Dude 1,142]

People in retail jobs don't get to negotiate their contracts Rob. Thus, are protected by stated and federal laws abroad. There is no chance in hell someone can be fired for pursuing justice. This would warrant unfair dismissal and a hefty fine for the business. Then again over there, retail staff and so on receive sick leave, vacation leave and retirement (401k equivalent) on top of their $16 an hour wage. Basically they are not treated like ####### as they are here.

I remember seeing a news story a few months back in Chicago where neither the police nor the store did anything about a guy who was a regular thief at a CVS store. Because of such moronic policies.

Then they should either follow the rules of their employment, or get another job. Are they employed as loss prevention officers? No, then go back to work and sell some effing cell phones and leave the law enforcement to those who are charged with that duty. Most stores do it because a $20 CD is nothing compared to a false imprisonment, or even personal injury lawsuit. My sister in law manages a store in Canada and they have similar rules at her store. At her store, they face criminal charges themselves if they happen to stop a suspected thief and are wrong.

[Heracles 417]

Then they should either follow the rules of their employment, or get another job. Are they employed as loss prevention officers? No, then go back to work and sell some effing cell phones and leave the law enforcement to those who are charged with that duty. Most stores do it because a $20 CD is nothing compared to a false imprisonment, or even personal injury lawsuit. My sister in law manages a store in Canada and they have similar rules at her store. At her store, they face criminal charges themselves if they happen to stop a suspected thief and are wrong.

Explains why Canada is not ranked as high as AUS. I get what you are saying and companies in AUS also tell you to not to chase or so on but an employee would never get fired. They say that for the employees safety. However, with manager intervention, you are legally allowed to pursue the person and detain then until police arrive.

What I have a problem with is employers here treating Americans like commodities or stock. Even you can be downsized with a minutes notice. Whereas, you would have to receive a payout in AUS period. One of my departments was moved in AUS and the employers who did not relocate all received payouts between $15K to $150K for their years of service. Over here, it would be oh well tough sh-t. So which system would you as an employee prefer?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It's an insurance issue, you are insured by the company while you're on the job. You aren't insured if you go belting off down the street after a shoplifter and get knifed or beaten up.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

In point of fact, most retail chains employ security staff specifically to handle shoplifting issues. The general store staff shouldn't have to get involved.

When the goods are insured and can be written off, it really isn't in the store employees best interest to tackle a thief.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Explains why Canada is not ranked as high as AUS. I get what you are saying and companies in AUS also tell you to not to chase or so on but an employee would never get fired. They say that for the employees safety. However, with manager intervention, you are legally allowed to pursue the person and detain then until police arrive.

What I have a problem with is employers here treating Americans like commodities or stock. Even you can be downsized with a minutes notice. Whereas, you would have to receive a payout in AUS period. One of my departments was moved in AUS and the employers who did not relocate all received payouts between $15K to $150K for their years of service. Over here, it would be oh well tough sh-t. So which system would you as an employee prefer?

No I can't, I negotiated my severance package.

I don't dispute that U.S. employment rights are heavily slanted towards the employer. There really should be more enforcement in place to protect the few laws that we do have.

[Heracles 417]

No I can't, I negotiated my severance package.

I don't dispute that U.S. employment rights are heavily slanted towards the employer. There really should be more enforcement in place to protect the few laws that we do have.

You almost work for the government though. Trying working in any other private sector and then come tell me what you can negotiate. They'll simply hire someone else than meet an individuals demands. In a country of 309 million, there is always someone to take your place. Ironically the US is exactly the place where AUS style employment laws are needed because supply and demand is heavily skewed in favor of the employer and that was before the crisis when unemployment was relatively low.

Edited April 29, 2010 by Booyah!

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

I would assume you have a higher-paying job than just some clerk at a Sprint store...but as far as the IP clause in your contract, imo, you got screwed.

Yeah, definitely higher paying than a retail clerk.

The IP clause is pretty standard in the industry I work in. I've worked for five different companies since I began in this industry 20 years ago, and each have had similar clauses in their contracts. We are exposed to a lot of intellectual property that is either the property of our employers or licensed to our employers and protected by non-disclosure agreements. If we invent something related to our business, it is almost a certainty that our exposure to that IP contributed to our invention. The assumption, therefore, is that it's almost impossible to claim that no resources of the company were used in an independent invention.

As an example, let's say you invented an improvement to a secret rocket engine design, and you did so on your own time and using your own resources. You would have a hard time making the claim that your invention was developed entirely independently since you could have not developed it without first being exposed to the secret rocket engine design. On the other hand, if you invented an improved can opener then that would have nothing to do with the business the company is involved in, would not involve the use of proprietary information, and would not be covered by the invention clause.

Another clause that is sometimes added is a non-competition clause. A restrictive form of this clause states you can't compete directly with the company for a fixed period (usually 2 years) after you leave. A less restrictive version says you can't use information acquired while you were at the company to directly compete with them for that period. Many people (including me) usually cross out this clause before signing the contract, since it would effectively mean you can't work in the same industry for two years. I haven't seen this one challenged in court yet, so I don't know if it would stand up.