|
Hi guys - I am new to the contracting business (1st contract) and am
just about to sign the contract my broker gave me. Everything seems ok,
except the termination clause seems a bit questionable to me:
"The Contract Employee shall, with just cause, have the right to
terminate the Agreement prior to the Termination Date with a minimum of
thirty (30) days notice and with Customer approval........Should the
Contract Employee terminate without cause, notice, approval, or before
the start of the Contract Assignment, the Contract Employee agrees to
indemnify and hold harmless from and against any and all costs and
expenses, which may incur as a result of such early termination.
Furthermore, should be unable to collect payment as a result of the
termination of this Agreement by the Contract Employee, for reasons of
performance, or Customer, will only compensate Contract Employee for
hours worked for the two weeks prior to the termination at the current
minimum wage, as dictated by federal and state labor laws."
Hmm - there are a few things that I don't like here (assuming I am
correctly interpreting) - 1st is a requirement of 30 days notice
(instead of 2 wk) and the 2nd is the deal where they pay me only minimum
wage under circumstances I am not totally in charge of and then where
they say that the customer must approve my voluntary termination?. Are
these two things pretty standard? If not, what would be more reasonable
and how would you recommend I try to negotiate with the broker?
Thanks,
Bob
P.S. I'm in AZ
|
| |
| |
Hi guys - I am new to the contracting business (1st contract) and am
just about to sign the contract my broker gave me. Everything seems
ok,
except the termination clause seems a bit questionable to me:
"The Contract Employee shall, with just cause, have the right to
terminate the Agreement prior to the Termination Date with a minimum
of
thirty (30) days notice and with Customer approval........Should the
Contract Employee terminate without cause, notice, approval, or
before
the start of the Contract Assignment, the Contract Employee agrees
to
indemnify and hold harmless from and against any and all costs and
expenses, which may incur as a result of such early termination.
Furthermore, should be unable to collect payment as a result of the
termination of this Agreement by the Contract Employee, for reasons
of
performance, or Customer, will only compensate Contract Employee for
hours worked for the two weeks prior to the termination at the
current
minimum wage, as dictated by federal and state labor laws."
Hmm - there are a few things that I don't like here (assuming I am
correctly interpreting) - 1st is a requirement of 30 days notice
(instead of 2 wk) and the 2nd is the deal where they pay me only
minimum
wage under circumstances I am not totally in charge of and then
where
they say that the customer must approve my voluntary termination?.
Are
these two things pretty standard? If not, what would be more
reasonable
and how would you recommend I try to negotiate with the broker?
P.S. I'm in AZ
That clause is not standard. It is also very aggressive. But it is
legal. Nobody can force you to work or stop you from quitting,
because of some pesky anti-slavery laws. But it's legal for you to
become, by contract, legally responsible for the damages caused by
your breach of the contract if you quit early. I've seen that minimum
wage clause a few times, but I would think it's appropriate only when
the employee cannot be replaced without delaying the project. But
it's legal for any employee to sign up to work for minimum wage.
If you can't get the job without signing the contract as-is, and if
you want the job badly enough, then maybe you would sign it as-is.
But if negotiations are possible, or if you are willing to risk not
getting the job, then there are several changes you could try to
negotiate. First, you would want to get rid of that silliness about
the customer having the right to deny your right to quit even with 30
days notice. Second, you could simply insist that you are not willing
to take minimum wage as a penalty under a performance guarantee. Your
position could be that you are willing to promise to do your best, but
not willing to guarantee satisfactory performance. Third, you would
want to clarify the phrase "just cause" so that it clearly means
circumstances beyond you reasonable control. If you leave that phrase
undefined, it could be interpreted to mean only causes having
something to do with this job, and not include such things as jail,
injury, reserve call up, deportation, or an obligation to take care of
an ailing parent in Yonkers.
McGyver
|
| |
| |
In article <TsgUc.411$nk.60@okepread05>, Bob Robertson says...
Hi guys - I am new to the contracting business (1st contract) and am
just about to sign the contract my broker gave me. Everything seems ok,
except the termination clause seems a bit questionable to me:
"The Contract Employee shall, with just cause, have the right to
terminate the Agreement prior to the Termination Date with a minimum of
thirty (30) days notice and with Customer approval........Should the
Contract Employee terminate without cause, notice, approval, or before
the start of the Contract Assignment, the Contract Employee agrees to
indemnify and hold harmless from and against any and all costs and
expenses, which may incur as a result of such early termination.
Furthermore, should be unable to collect payment as a result of the
termination of this Agreement by the Contract Employee, for reasons of
performance, or Customer, will only compensate Contract Employee for
hours worked for the two weeks prior to the termination at the current
minimum wage, as dictated by federal and state labor laws."
Hmm - there are a few things that I don't like here (assuming I am
correctly interpreting) - 1st is a requirement of 30 days notice
(instead of 2 wk) and the 2nd is the deal where they pay me only minimum
wage under circumstances I am not totally in charge of and then where
they say that the customer must approve my voluntary termination?. Are
these two things pretty standard? If not, what would be more reasonable
and how would you recommend I try to negotiate with the broker?
Thanks,
Bob
P.S. I'm in AZ
Bob,
I used to work as a contract mainframe programmer/analyst in AZ and never heard
of such a clause. It appears that they have put a clause in your contract that
essentially compels you to work and holds you liable if you leave without giving
a 30-day notice. It also appears that you could be compelled to work against
your will if your employer's client does not want you to leave.
The wording of this clause is kind of strange. For example, it says you may
terminate "with just cause" and give your 30-day notice. Does this mean that
you cannot terminate without "just cause?" Who decides whether your cause is
"just?"
The final sentence that you quoted makes no grammatical sense. Have you quoted
it accurately?
This looks like something that someone has drafted without the advice or
assistance of an attorney.
Two questions come to mind: Is it enforceable? And would the employer seriously
attempt to enforce it? If you have accurately quoted the last sentence in the
clause, it is not likely to be enforceable as it is unclear as to who is doing
what to who. To enforce the contract, your employer will have to shell out a
minimum of $20,000 in hard cold cash to sue you. And the outcome is less than
certain. How likely is he to do that?
If you have some other offer, I would say pass this one up. If this is the only
game in town, then take your chances.
|
| |
| |
Cross it out. Sign the contract and send it back. See if there is any
response. If not, you are fine. If so, negotiate.
|
| |
| |
|
