Abuses Hide in the Silence of Nondisparagement Agreements

Re:Abuses Hide in the Silence of Nondisparagement Agreements by Hnrobert42 on Friday July 21, 2017 @09:23PM (#14824916)

From the article: Employees increasingly “have to give up their constitutional right to speak freely about their experiences if they want to be part of the work force,” said Nancy E. Smith, a partner at the law firm Smith Mullin. “The silence sends a message: Men’s jobs are more important than women’s lives.”

I don't understand how the second quote is related to the first except in the case of the discrimination settlements.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Abuses Hide in the Silence of Nondisparagement Agreements by ivanbakel on Friday July 21, 2017 @09:55PM (#14824997)

I'm guessing it has something to do with the missing part of the first quote. It doesn't look like the lawyer quoted used the word "employees" to start that sentence, and I'd wager it was more specifically about women in the workforce being made to sign these agreements.

[ Parent | on HN ]

[dead]

Re:Abuses Hide in the Silence of Nondisparagement Agreements by tptacek on Friday July 21, 2017 @10:08PM (#14825036)

No, it's a sign that it's a quote taken from interview whose context was a woman being prevented from relating her harassment story by a non-disparagement clause.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Abuses Hide in the Silence of Nondisparagement Agreements by tbrownaw on Friday July 21, 2017 @10:35PM (#14825105)

The article is written to present non-disparagement agreements as being exclusively a response to harassment complaints.

Most of the article talks about harassment complaints. The few parts that hint at non-disparagement clauses seeing more general use are immediately followed by tie-ins to... guess what, harassment complaints. Like the quote in the gp comment.

There's no hint at what else might be getting buried, no hint that there even could be other things getting buried, and certainly no attempt to quantify what's getting buried.

There's just implicit assumptions, of the sort that are easy to not notice and so just blindly accept, tying these agreements to, and so reinforcing, the current hotbutton issue.

I don't like things that favor feedback loops over (attempts to gather) data.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Abuses Hide in the Silence of Nondisparagement Agreements by matt4077 on Saturday July 22, 2017 @03:31AM (#14825870)

> The article is written to present non-disparagement agreements as being exclusively a response to harassment complaints.

THat's like saying an article about french fries neglects the non-fries uses of potatoes.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Abuses Hide in the Silence of Nondisparagement Agreements by tbrownaw on Saturday July 22, 2017 @04:53AM (#14826097)

And if hamburgers were the current hotbutton topic, I rather imagine I'd find an article about potatoes and how they're used to make fries (and no mention of them being good for anything else) similarly annoying.

Potatoes are more than just a side item for hamburgers dammit! ;)

[ Parent | on HN ]