Modifying Employment Agreements? 728
An anonymous reader asks: "I am starting a new job, after months of unemployment. While out of work, I started a technology related business. I do not believe there is a conflict in the services provided by this business and the job I am taking.
As has been standard with previous employers, I have been asked to sign an agreement that states in part that I am to disclose to the company anything that I create wether or not during company time, and wether or not it relates to the company.
I also must agree that these same creations or inventions become the sole property of the company. I would like to change the wording to only include those creations, inventions and other Intellectual Property that is the direct result of work performed for the company, involved use of company property, and/or was created or invented during paid hours spent working for the company.
What success or failure have other Slashdot readers had when dealing with wide reaching employment agreements such as this? How did you approach management with your modifications?"
3 words: HIRE A LAWYER. (Score:5, Insightful)
and if things you develop outside of work really matter to you, and you plan on developing something significant, it's worth the couple grand to get solid advice and contractual clauses that will hold up in a lawsuit. it makes sense and is worth the one time cost to protect yourself and your intellectual assets just like you'd insure your car or house in case of some unlikely disaster.
in fact, i'd ALWAYS recommend having a lawyer review any employment contract before signing, just in case. some clauses in employment contracts can be pretty sneaky or draconian but sadly most people just gloss over them and look where to sign.
i'm not a lawyer but am damn happy that i had one look over/amend my employment contracts before signing.
hope this helps.
-fren
Get a lawyer! (Score:5, Insightful)
Regardless of whatever advice pops up in this thread, though, the one thing that you absolutely, positively must do is consult a lawyer. Take the tips you pick up here and run it past said lawyer; they'll advise you as to whether or not they'll work and will convert the advice into legalese for you. If you can't afford a lawyer, track down the family member/friend that is a lawyer and ask/beg for their help.
Employment contracts are very, very important things that businesses take seriously. If you're not careful, you'll put yourself in a position where you could be sued without even realizing you'd done so, which is doubleplusungood. Get a lawyer to help mitigate this risk.
Assume that you're just as good at revising some lawyer's contract as you'd expect that lawyer to be at revising your code. Act accordingly.
Good luck (Score:3, Insightful)
Odds are if you make it an issue they will go with the other person unless you really stand out.
Present them with your own contract rider... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd expect that your new employer should already know of your personal business because it should be listed on your resume. Therefore, when they ask you to sign a contract saying that everything you create belongs to the company, you should ask for a specific rider that acknowledges that you have the outside interest, and that the company is aquiring no rights to that property. In exchange, you'll offer to promise that you will not work on that project while on company time or using company resources without permission. You can frame it in the terms of a disclosure as required by their contract of something you have created and will continue to create that has no relation to the company.
If the company thinks that just putting you on salary means they own your mind 24/7, then you likely don't want to accept their offer anyway. Unless you've omitted all mention of this project on you resume, they should have known you have it and intend to keep it. If they think by hiring you they're going get ownership of your small company...
Oh, and since the company no doubt had a lawyer create the agreement they're asking you to sign, you should have a lawyer create the document you're going to ask them to sign...
How replaceable are you? (Score:5, Insightful)
Never had a problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Generally, all I do is delete a word or two to change it from saying that they get the rights to everything, regardless of whether or not it was on company time or company equipment, to saying that they get the rights only if it was on company time or equipment.
-Todd
Re:3 words: HIRE A LAWYER. (Score:5, Insightful)
Hey, good luck with that! (Score:4, Insightful)
In today's I.T. market, I guess there are two major considerations to stick in the hopper before you decide:
1. Tinkering with this agreement could put you in a bad light with the new bosses. That said, I know a number of people who have significantly altered or rejected these agreements without significant fallout. Just keep in mind you are managing some "first impressions".
2. Each I.T. worker is very busy trying to just get the work of at least two people done and our bosses aren't much different. I have to wonder just how much time and energy these bosses would have left later for pursuing breach of contract claims against you at a later time. Reasonably speaking, if I was in the bosses' Johnston and Murphy's later on, it would depend upon the time and effort involved. Big breach, go after the employee. Little breach, let it slide, the next TPS Report is due on Friday after all...
I admire your sense of morality... (Score:4, Insightful)
I do admire your sense of morality, and your desire to adhere to the agreement your employer is forcing you to sign.
However.
That clause doesn't exactly have your best interests in mind. You're not the first person to have that question, about that clause. Whats important is, you adhere to the spirit of the agreement---You dont take shit from work and release it as open source, and conversely, you dont work on a level editor for Super Mega Mario Pong World 3 on company time (or company resources). Similarly, you dont talk about your work in your weblog, and you dont spend company time (and use company resources) talking about your intensely interesting personal life outside of work.
Theres an unspoken agreement that most companies have regarding that clause. Adhere to the spirit of it, and be sure nobody gets hurt---especially them---and you'll be fine.
No sense in stirring up things, either. What they dont know wont hurt them, y'know?
Cheers,
Re:3 words: HIRE A LAWYER. (Score:5, Insightful)
have had modified EVERY employment contract I have ever seen.
these things are changeable and you do NOT want to work there if they are not.
always ALWAYS have the clause stricken that pertains to your own time. and or have a clause added that clearly states that your time is YOUR TIME. same as any ideas, inventions, lottery winnings done on your own time with your own resources.
It will cost you from $60.00 to $240.00 to get this done by a lawyer.
Re:Present them with your own contract rider... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Get a lawyer! (Score:3, Insightful)
Well said. you'd have my mod points if I had'em
Re:What's more important, a job or your pride? (Score:4, Insightful)
If you are respectful and have a lawyer propose a reasonable amendment saying that you own the IP to non-competing home projects unrelated to work, they probably won't give a fuck and will have their legal team clear it. They have better things to worry about -- from their perspective they just don't want some asshole employee taking their secrets, leaving, and competing with them -- but do expect that any changes to an NDA/noncompete will be seen as threatening at first.
If it is the case they're draconian idiots then yeah you'll probably want to move on.
But in most cases, they probably don't care, and whoever is hiring you didn't draft the NDA in the first place (hell, it's probably a safe bet they haven't even read it -- they just paid some lawyer to cover their ass.)
-fren
Re:Good luck (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:One approach (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:3 words: HIRE A LAWYER. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Been there (Score:3, Insightful)
Sound advice... (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't be afraid to suggest and negotiate changes to your contract. They prefer that you sign the default one, since any changes will probably have to be okay'd by their lawyer, but if they really want you they might be amendable. I've never signed an employment contract without having made some changes first... incidentally, I made the changes myself, but had them checked by a lawyer afterwards.
Oh and don't fall for the old traps, like "We just want you to sign the standard contract; company policy, you know? Of course we don't actually enforce this". Or the rather popular "Don't you trust us?". You're entering into a business agreement; if you rely on trust, it''ll probably come back to bite you one day.
Questions about whether NDAs stand up in court.... (Score:5, Insightful)
I declined to sign it period. Two attorneys told me that these things never stand up in court and I mentioned that to my company's legal department. They didn't push the issue and I never signed anything. They are intended generally to send a shudder down your spine. I didn't sign it because if I know they don't stand up in court and the company knows it, what's the point?
However what I did start doing after that was copyrighting programs that I thought may be potentially valuable. I do a lot of programming of perl apps and have taken to copyrighting all of the valuable ones.
Does my company have a right to those apps? I don't think so, they can't produce a signed NDA.
Re:Hire a Lawyer but You May Not Like the Results (Score:5, Insightful)
You're right -- your lawyer will find a number of other things that need to be changed as well (my lawyer found 5-10 little nitpicky things) and the process of getting these things changed is a pain in the ass, and can strain a relationship. It also takes FOREVER. Unfortunately, it could also result in you not getting hired.
However, there is a good foundation of trust that results from both sides fully understanding an employment contract -- and you can rest easy knowing there are no 'gotchas' or time bombs lurking in the contract that can fuck you over in case things turn sour. I would not work anywhere without that foundation of mutual trust, but the parent is correct in that at some point you have to pick your battles or risk losing the job.
I just finished a five month-long contract negotiation for a fairly high-level architect position at a startup, and it was painful but everyone is now happy -- just keep your cool (don't get pissed off/frustrated), pick your battles, and be willing to compromise.
-fren
Lawyer or no... (Score:2, Insightful)
If a question comes up, I think that your reasons behind the change are very good and if you present those reasons properly, the company should have no problem accepting them. I've changed contracts with companies I've worked for before, pointed out the changes to the hiring manager, and their response has always been, "Okay, sure, whatever, when can you start?"
Move to California (Score:2, Insightful)
A copy of the law can be found here [unixguru.com].
The many body of 2870 is below. 2872 requires the company to notify you of this.
-bri
Any provision in an employment agreement which provides that an employee shall assign, or offer to assign, any of his or her rights in an invention to his or her employer shall not apply to an invention that the employee developed entirely on his or her own time without using the employer's equipment, supplies, facilities, or trade secret information except for those inventions that either:
Relate at the time of conception or reduction to practice of the invention to the employer's business, or actual or demonstrably anticipated research or development of the employer; or
Result from any work performed by the employee for the employer.
Re:I admire your sense of morality... (Score:5, Insightful)
I've heard of several cases where the employee developed something on his own time, using his own equipment, and found that when he started making money at it, the company claimed it as theirs.
I wouldn't trust any "unspoken agreement".
Re:3 words: HIRE A LAWYER. (Score:5, Insightful)
American AC in Paris had a great quote below -- "Assume that you're just as good at revising some lawyer's contract as you'd expect that lawyer to be at revising your code. Act accordingly."
-fren
Re:3 words: HIRE A LAWYER. (Score:3, Insightful)
Most likely he will listen to you, read the contract, suggest a wording change to the contract and send it back to you.
I shouldn't be anymore than visiting his office.
Of course a lawyer is best, but (Score:3, Insightful)
Ultimately, they amended the agreement. They weren't trying to gobble up IP that their employees might work on in their spare time; it was more of an anti-compete clause to prevent someone using their internal knowledge of projects to develop competing software. The new agreement was acceptable to me, and we were able to move on.
The bottom line, though, is not to just accept what you're given. If they've offered you a position, they want you. Along with that comes accepting that you are an individual who may have your own ideas and projects, and they they simply do not own you. I fought for my rights, and so should you.
Re:3 words: HIRE A LAWYER. (Score:4, Insightful)
You may not lose the job, but, if you don't notice the funny wording in the next to the last paragraph on page sixteen, you may sign away rights that you hadn't thought about.
A programmer trying to be his own contract lawyer makes as much sense as a lawyer trying to write and support a custom contact manager or billing system for his firm.
Re:3 words: HIRE A LAWYER. (Score:5, Insightful)
In case you hadn't noticed, "sue them straight to the poorhouse" has become a kneejerk reaction in business in general. Since this person's personal business is on the line, getting professional advice is not just good advice; it's the best advice.
Re:Hire a Lawyer but You May Not Like the Results (Score:3, Insightful)
So your lawyer notices a bunch of things that would be convenient to have in your contract. Don't jump at all of them. Look at them, and decide your priorities. Go back to your new employer with a few versions; a minimalist (My time is my time), a nice-to-have (paid holidays), and a luxury contract (Paid vacations.)
Offer a compromise... Is double-on-overtime worth a few thousand less per year (on average)? Are paid vacations worth a couple dollars less per hour?
Re:Get a lawyer! (Score:2, Insightful)
A good lawyer can help you understand the meaning of the contract, can help you amend the contract, and can even help evaluate your chances of winning were you to get sued.
Remember, the type of lawyer that is best suited to this type of work is a trial lawyer. They make their money mostly by going to trial. It is a conflict of interest to ask a lawyer to help you mitigate the risk of being sued. He or she can help you position yourself to maximize your chances of winning but you still have to incur the expense of a trial in order to win it (unless the judge says otherwise).
Put it in context (Score:2, Insightful)
At a bigger company, good luck. Even though the risks may be as high, the HR clerk you're working with won't want to discuss it. Either take the job and deal with the contract, or look elsewhere.
Re:What's more important, a job or your pride? (Score:4, Insightful)
Bah. I've never signed a stock employment contract yet. Some claimed they owned all the IP I produced, related to the company's work or not, done on my time or theirs. That's simply BS.
The easiest way for them to swallow the fact they need to change it is to say that legally you can't sign that paper. For example, you have an ongoing relationship with a former client and your contract with them says that you're required to patch bugs for them. But you've also agreed to sign over the IP of those patches to the client as well. If you signed the stock agreement your new company would own the IP of those patches too. So you legally can't do it.
If you phrase it that way, they'll see that you're not being unreasonable, and aren't trying to screw them over. They'll probably also see that you know your legal obligations and don't treat them lightly. Because of this, they'll probably be willing to make the change. So when they do make the change, make sure it's not too restrictive and lets you own the IP of any love songs you write to your gerbil on your own time.
Re:One approach (Score:3, Insightful)
Agreement to take off-hour liability? (Score:2, Insightful)
As long as you are asking a lawyer, could you ask another question: Do these agreements give companies more liability than they realize?
Companies ask employees to give up their IP such that the company would be able to profit from off-hour employee brilliance. Consider the case where off-hour employee brilliance leads to creating something that does a lot of harm in the community. In turn, that harm leads to lawsuits. It seems to me that the employee could pin the negative consequences to the employer.
Clearly companies are responsible for on-hour actions good or bad - within reason. On the good side patents and copyrights can lead to new revenue. On the bad side new products can violate other companies' IP and lead to financial penalties. Do agreements like the poster describes cause companies to take on the same potential risks and rewards for off-hour creations?
Sounds like a situation ripe for abuse by all parties involved.
One thing I haven't seen mentioned... (Score:5, Insightful)
They'll work with you to settle the disagreement in wording until both sides are happy. This happens more often than people think.
Re:3 words: HIRE A LAWYER. (Score:2, Insightful)
If they're asking him to sign an employment agreement, then they have offered him a job. To pull that offer because he had a lawyer look over something would be illegal in most places.
Anything can be said with a smile... (Score:3, Insightful)
The important point is that we at all times had a friendly discussion about what we both wanted out of the contract, and both acted at all times like differences were small bumps to work around, not deal-killers or screw-me-screw-you options.
As long as you're polite and friendly about it, you can say "I'm not comfortable signing this contract as is, specifically because of these parts." Go in with your reasons and your alternatives (that should be acceptable to them as well as to you). Show that you understand their concerns, and how they're trying to protect themselves (in the IP case, they don't want you to become a millionaire instead of them by working on their ideas in the evening). And be prepared to walk away with a smile and a "too bad, maybe another time" attitude. Most especially, push for clarification of terms and limits, rather than "how can I protect myself from getting screwed?" approach (even thought that's what you're doing).
IANAL, and it would be a good idea to run it by one regardless.
Re:One approach (MOD UP) (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Get a lawyer! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:3 words: HIRE A LAWYER. (Score:3, Insightful)
So the only two choices are: eat shit or unemployed? Sorry. There's more to the economy than shit-shoveling cubicle jobs.
Re:I admire your sense of morality... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Sound advice... (Score:2, Insightful)
When someone puts a "Standard Contract/Agreement" in front of me, I apply my "Standard Policy" of having my lawyer look it over, it buys me time to read it over in a relaxed timeframe if nothing else (no way am I going to sign a multi-page contract I've only had a minute to read). Keep in mind that any paperwork they put in front of you was written by their lawyers with their benefit in mind - not yours. Any benefit to you is incidental or required by law.
This also applies to separation agreements as well.
Re:3 words: HIRE A LAWYER. (Score:2, Insightful)
I would still have gotten out of the company, however. Not giving a new employee the employee handbook is just stupid.
Been there, done that (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:3 words: HIRE A LAWYER. (Score:3, Insightful)
If you're worried about the company being able to steal your inventions, it means you're the inventive type-- Working at a lower paying job for a time while you complete the idea can actually be beneficial (since generally these jobs take less time from you than any non 9-5 programming jobs, and I'm not aware of many of those).
In some states, state law says that what you do on your own time with your own materials is YOURS, regardless of the fscking contracts.
I don't know which has precedence over what, but I imagine its the state laws.
I am NOT an identured servent, I am NOT a peasant. If you allow yourself to be treated as such, then you are one.
Since I am not a peasant, I expect reasonable compensation for my time and ideas, and if I believe that I will not be receiving that reasonable compensation, I will happily forgoe the opportunity to screw myself over.
Those that allow themselves to be screwed over by such clauses in their employment contracts are doing a disservice to those who would not.
Think "security" versus "freedom" arguments from many great luminaries.
Same thing happened to me. (Score:3, Insightful)
I was in the same boat, asked to sign the same thing. I simply asked them to change it, and they said "no problem" and did so. I even had them amend the names of some existing projects of mine as specific exceptions to that clause.
While my experience of precisely ONE doesn't amount to much, statistically, I bet you'd have a similarly easy time of it at any small company unless it's being run by an absolutely insane dictator. Nine times out of ten it's just some boilerplate legalese thrown in by the company lawyer that the owner doesn't even care about- the guy who hired me didn't even know it was there.
Hint: think about human nature and laziness. Supply your own suggested, amended text, and they'll be much more likely to change it than they would be otherwise. Less work for them.
At a larger company, I bet you'd have a much tougher time getting that change done, just because there are more layers of red tape to go through, and maybe a fulltime legal department whose egos and anal-retentive preferences are at stake, as opposed to an independent lawyer whom they get in touch with three times a year when they need a little legal work done.
Good luck, and kudos for noticing that absolute B.S. in the contract.
Copyrighting programs (Score:2, Insightful)
This post illustrates several of the common misconceptions about copyright law. The phrase 'copyrigting programs' does not make sense. Copyright is not a process, it is a physical attribute. Every physical manifesation of an idea has a copyright, just like it has a color. You can't 'copyright' anything. You can assign the copyright to another party, you can register the object with the U.S. Copyright Office, or you can place the circle-c symbol on it. That's not the same as copyrighting.
In general, whoever creates the object (photograph, program, song, whatever), owns the copyright. There are specific exceptions, however. The one applicable to here is the exception called 'work for hire'. Anything that you produce as a result of employement belongs to the employer, unless there is an agreement to the contrary.
The definition of work for hire in the copyright law is:
(1) a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment; or
There are some additional defitions, but none that are relevant here. Clearly, if these programs you create fall within the scope of your employement, your employer owns them, not you. You can't copyright them because you don't own the copyright.
So why do folks register copyrights or put a copyright notice on a program? You can think of it like putting up a 'no trespassing' sign. Putting up the sign does not make it illegal to trespass, it just makes it harder for someone to claim they didn't know that it was illegal to trespass. Putting the mark on the program does not grant you any more legal rights, but it removes one of the common defenses of infringement,innocent infringement. If you put the copyright mark on the program, no one can claim they didn't know that it wasn't in the public domain.
Re:3 words: HIRE A LAWYER. (Score:4, Insightful)
You're right... you should work for a company with no HR department. And when you don't get your paycheck, maybe the marketing department will help you out.
Re:3 words: HIRE A LAWYER. (Score:3, Insightful)
The way I left the company was by e-mail the tech support address and flood the tech support voice mail with a ton of outside-my-area complaints about things that didn't work and impacted my workflow system. My boss couldn't stand that I had did that, and wanted to fire me... calling me late at night in rage just to upset me.
However, it all boomeranged back at him, because documenting system failures to the accounts marked for system failure reports is in no way of a violation of company policy, it's exactly what policy says to do. There was no legit reason to fire me, just the standard excuse of letting go an at-will employee for no reason at all. However, that entitled me to full severance, a cash-out of the comp days I was awarded for being forced to work weekends and overnights, and full unemployment. A golden parachute worth at total of $10,000 that I wouldn't have gotten if I simply said "I quit." It pays to know the rules and play by them...
Re:3 words: HIRE A LAWYER. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:3 words: HIRE A LAWYER. (Score:1, Insightful)
Hey, it worked for andy!
Re:Ask a lawyer -- for the UN-obvious reason (Score:3, Insightful)
A brief lesson in negotiation (Score:2, Insightful)
> agreements such as this? How did you approach management with your modifications?"
About 10 years ago I was an independent software consultant who worked for a lot of big companies. I ran into this exact problem while chasing some business at Eli Lilly. When I tried to negotiate for ownership of the projects I would be working on after hours (and off the clock) their legal team quickly decided that I posed too much of a risk to Lily's intellectual property and the entire offer was rescinded.
In hindsight, I can see how it happened... as a drug company with lots of multi-billion dollar patents their IP is more valuable than anything else. So their legal department is maniacally focused on protecting the corporate jewels, even if it means going overboard on some poor little guy who was going come in an build a document workflow system.
(As an aside: Two weeks later I signed a six-month contract with Mobil Oil.)
I would handle this problem the exact same way if offered the chance to change anything. Signing an agreement you cannot agree to is worse than moving back in with your parents as a grown man.
That little cautionary tales aside, employment contracts are highly negotiable and should be reviewed heavily before executed. My favorite negotiating tactic is to read the offending term(s) out loud to my hiring manager and ask him if he would agree to this if he were in my shoes. That one has always worked. I last used this on a Silicon Valley lawyer who was my company's General Counsel. He told me I was the first new hire to actually read the damn agreement. This clearly earned me his respect.
Another nice maneuver is to ask the other person "is this fair?" or "Why would this be fair?"
Asking someone intelligent to justify or explain a stupid contractual term is usually a great way to get it removed from the contract.
Re:3 words: HIRE A LAWYER (That's why) (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Is 'signing online' binding? (Score:3, Insightful)
Not blurry at all. (Score:3, Insightful)
Anything outside is fair game, including things simialr to what they produce - the world is full of examples of people leaving a company because they think they can do the same thing better. And that's perfectly fine, yes the company is training you but they are directly receiving the benefit of that training. That's why it's also considered rude to leave a company right after some major training.
The way a company can combat a person leaving to work on something similar is to listed to what the person has to say and really reward them for good ideas. The people who have bad ideas, who cares if they go off to compete with you?
Re:Not blurry at all. (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:3 words: HIRE A LAWYER (That's why) (Score:4, Insightful)
There are currently many more people who want jobs then there are jobs to be had. Especially the non-crappy high-paying kinds of jobs.
This means that we are in an "employer's market" because the employer has the bargaining power.
See, there are enough potential employees who are qualified (in most arenas) that all those who refuse to accept whatever they are given can just be ignored. All the available positions will still be filled.
So, yes, right now, in this job market, it is the employer who has the biggest say. Just like, about 5 years ago, it was the employee who could (and did) demand and get whatever they wanted.
Thats not to say that you have to agree to terms you do not like, just that, with a company of any size, you will simply be skipped, and the job will go to someone who doesn't care or doesn't read as carefully.
Being all confrontational isn't a good way to get a job.
Just obfuscate the whole issue (Score:2, Insightful)
I stalled on signing it. Was bothered by the IT secretary for a while. "Lost" it for a while. Then "misplaced" it for a while. Was given another copy. Stalled. Eventually, the IT secretary forgot about it and was luckily moved on to a different AVP team. Our paths diverged further as our relationship became lost forever in a series of intellectual power re-appropriation plans.
Obviously, this won't work in all environments. But it is amazing how much you can get away with in a big corporate drone environment. My gosh, look at the id10ts surrounding you that they *won't* fire!
Re:3 words: HIRE A LAWYER (That's why) (Score:4, Insightful)
with a company of any size, you will simply be skipped, and the job will go to someone who doesn't care or doesn't read as carefully.
I guess you haven't been participating in hiring people for such nice jobs, then. Fact is that I could care less about next 20 applicants that are willing to sign anything my company demands, if they are not good enough. The guy who is good enough is still worth the hassle of negotiating contract over again. Last time we hired someone we got 13 candidates (had to do it via contracting agencies, which sucks... not contractors but agencies), and chose the best one. I wouldn't have bothered to hire most of other 12 in the first place, and definitely wouldn't have chosen any of few remaining ok candidates over some petty contract dispute. So, we worked things through (nothing fancy; in this case no rewording of contracts... although he should have been more careful with his deal with contracting bloodsuckers), and were happy to get the best candidate. Later on when he moved on (due to problems with his contracting scumbags), contracting co. tried to bring in a warm body to replace him; my company just cancelled the contract (and req went to another dept for budget reasons). So much for theory of "just bring in next humble servant".
Really, although job market is not as good for applicants in general as it used to be, there is HUGE difference between "just ok" and "very good" applicants. This is especially since difference in overall productivity is up to factor of 10, between rock stars and barely ok code peons. And in latter category, overhead of helping and instructing them means their input on overall productivity of team may become negative.
So, there are jobs and then there are jobs; ones where employer just needs warm bodies are ones being shipped overseas, and there there's probably not much room for any negotiation. But in many other jobs you can indeed negotiate terms; not dictate your own terms, but negotiate and find working compromise. Just ASSUMING there's nothing you can do guarantees you'll be eating dog food with terms.
Re:3 words: HIRE A LAWYER. (Score:3, Insightful)
Not if you are an "exempt" employee. You can tell if you get paid overtime: if you aren't, you are exempt. If you are exempt, you are indeed not paid for a specific number of hours.
Alternatively, if stuff I do "in my own time" at 1am could be claimed by the company, perhaps this means I don't have to bother coming into the office next day, since I've been hard at work all night at home..?
Yes, that's indeed the general idea: if you did something even remotely related to the company's business at 1am, then you were working for them at that time. However, if the stuff you did at 1am didn't contribute to their bottom line, it was wasted effort. And whether you need to come into the office the next day depends on whether you are needed, not on your total number of hours worked--remember, you are "exempt" from overtime.
Re:4 words: this is about value (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, it's a part of the explanation. When the company has the upper hand, it's merciless. But after you've been hired, it's much more expensive to replace you. So people who feel that they've been mistreated, are less than anxious to jump when someone shouts frog. Most people don't really want to file an wrongful dismissal suit, but some do. So replacing people is expensive. (Yeah, it can be done. I've seen jobs defined out of existence because some honcho was mad at someone
There's a reason for the Dilbert mentality, and Catbert plays as large a part as the PHB.
You may not like it, but there is a logic to these things, and it is simple and consistent. In this case it leads to the conclusion that you have very little power. Since they won't value you for doing your job well, you might as well not...unless you want to. They already value you the same as if you were doing your job poorly, so why bother.
But this isn't the only way! Some places do value good employees, and encourage them. Where good employees are valued, people tend to want to be good employees. And this doesn't mean be 24 hour robots. (See previous paragraph, and extrapolate.) Where good employees are respected, it also starts in HR. A place that won't allow reasonable modifications to an employment contract is a place that you should work at no longer than you must. If they won't allow reasonable modifications, don't take the job unless you are desperate. If you are so desperate you don't dare ask, and it turns out to be a good job, ask then (as soon as you dare) about a contract modification. (If they won't, you'ld better sharpen your resume.)
But don't lie, and don't hide your work. That's a way to get yourself in so much trouble that you don't want to think about it. (You might want to stop working on it for awhile, though, until the contract mess is straightened up.)
It's called Negotiation (Score:2, Insightful)
If they've made an offer, and you've gotten to the point of signing a contract, then they want you. Don't assume that if you want a modification of the contract then they'll simply go elsewhere. Propose a modification that protects their side to. They will be most interested in making a distinction between the two domains of the two businesses. If the domains overlap you've got a problem.
When it comes to writing the language, though, they will have a lawyer. You get one too.
As an aside, it may come down to whether the law considers that you were "work for hire" or "professional services". One way to distinguish (in terms of the law) is whether you used company equipment to do your work for them. I always try to use my own computer and software, and only asking them to buy software that others use. I look at it as providing a professional service. In that case, my other pursuits are protected. Only my hours for them are subject to review.