Re:Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US ...
by dodobirdlord on Thursday December 03, 2020 @03:44AM
(#25286912)
> entirely nothing but a list of terms advantageous to one party
The obvious counterpoint is that usually a job offer involves getting paid.
Re:Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US ...
by modo_mario on Thursday December 03, 2020 @04:50AM
(#25287344)
Which is why people take the job but which doesn't relate much to a large part of the negotiation being rigged in favour of one party.
You could say the same about when the Silicon Valley salary cartel was uncovered. "yeah it's anticompetitive and negatively impacts workers but,....but these companies offer you food at work and comfortable workplace and all that."
Re:Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US ...
by clairity on Thursday December 03, 2020 @11:39AM
(#25290758)
the company gets value often many times the employee's compensation, so it's a value exchange. it's entirely valid to negotiate the terms of that exchange. what's not valid is tolerating, even encouraging, the highly asymmetric negotiating positions between corporation and individual.
Re:Google illegally spied on workers before firing them, US ...
by waheoo on Wednesday December 02, 2020 @06:15PM
(#25283085)
This is essentially the same outcome.
They start relationships with everyone poorly and they pay the price.
There is a reason stuff like the danmore debacle can even happen.
They're a huge echo chamber.
Imagine B2B contracts were written this way...whatever company has the bigger ego authors every last word and walks away the moment a detail is questioned. You could only afford negotiation tactics at that abuse level if you literally have customers begging it the alter of death to buy your product at a willingness to surrender all in order to make it happen. Plus they would sign but still hate you can hope to end the relationship with 0 loyalty the moment an alternative appeared on the market.