Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 85

Thread: Would it be legal to sign away your rights to a corporation?

  1. #1
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690

    Would it be legal to sign away your rights to a corporation?

    Was trying to expain liberty so someone who does not want to seem to understand this concept.

    For the purposes of this discussion let's go with all drug use, on your time, was legal. So the arguement is that a corporation who is only paying you for the time that you're working on its behalf, can dictate what you do on your free time, provided that what you do is legal where and when you do it. In this case it was about using marijuana. However if a business/corporation can dictate even one aspect of your legal free time, what else can be dictated?

    I see this as a gate way into saying, if you own guns, go shooting, engage in carnal activities, eat butter, drive a car that has an I.C.E., or any number of otherwise legal activities, that you can be fired/denied a job. Mind you, you're only being compensated for the time spent "on the clock" but the rest of your time is under their control as well?

    What are your thoughts? Could/Should all/any companies create or beable to create contracts of this nature that would be legally binding? I could understand a contract of this nature if you're salary, hence, always "on the clock" but, I am generally refering to time card punching jobs/work.



    Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  2. #2
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756
    I would say it is legal for a company/corporation to make demands upon what a person does or doesn't do on their free time as a condition of employment. Especially since they already do that by requiring random drug testing as a condition of employment so why wouldn't that also encompass any other activity whether that activity is legal or not?

    I would also say it is legal for a person to not accept employment with any company/corporation that makes demands upon what a person does or doesn't do on their free time.

    I would say that would be liberty for both sides.
    Last edited by Bikenut; 03-02-2016 at 10:41 AM.
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boone County, KY
    Posts
    312
    The company can dictate what you do off the job. Regarding marijuana, suppose you smoked all weekend on your free time off. But Monday morning you go to work and they do a random drug test on you and found marijuana in your system. They can fire you for failing a drug test even if you did not smoke on the job.

    How? If company policy has a no drugs policy and it says it in their handbook and you signed a piece of paper agreeing to company policies as a condition for employment. They can use that against you.


    Another way a corporation governs your life is through HOA's, protective and/or restrictive covenants & deed restrictions . Before buying a house in some gated lot or development , you agree to conditions and restrictions in order to buy a house in that development. The deed restrictions say you cannot put up an American flag or Christmas decorations. And if you do you can get fined an/or hauled off to court. You signed a private binding contract and agreed to it's terms and restrictions.

    So yes, signing your rights away in those examples are legal. The arguments are that you don't have to work for some place that has policies like that in force. Or you don't have to live in some development that takes away your rights for self expression.

    Is this right or fair? It's the law, unless it violates state or Federal Law.
    .
    I am not a lawyer, I study the history of gun control laws.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,163
    Rights are "signed away" during military service.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    That's the whole point of a contract. Each side has the freedom to agree to the terms.

    You aren't fired for the "off-duty smoking," in as much as you are fired for breach of contract.

    The employer probably gets cheaper liability insurance if he tests for drugs. Whereas, he might be more liable if a hung-over employee causes an accident, and he didn't have methods and policies in place to discourage it.

    Don't like it? Get a job somewhere else where the employer doesn't mind what you do off duty. Keep in mind he might pay less because his insurance is higher.

    The specifics are variable, of course. That's just one example.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  6. #6
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,886
    night, while you are correct on the military, do not forget those DoD civilians/contractors who either hold clearances or work on 'sensitive' equipment and signed away their rights.

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,163
    There is much of which you, Grasshopper, are not aware.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    To be pedantic about the whole thing: No, you cannot sign away your rights. They will exist regardless if you exercise them or not. (Military service being a trade of certain rights for other rights.)

    What you are doing is agreeing to conform your behavior to the desires/dictates of an employer in exchange for certain tangible things.

    It's like the perpetual discussion of a private business' "right" to prohibit firearms on its property vs. your "right" to keep and bear arms extending to doing so on someone else's private property.

    I see the major point of the question as falling somewhere along the lines of "Can a corporation ask you not to exercise your rights?" The answer, of course, is that they can ask all they want. It is up to you to decide whether or not to do so.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  9. #9
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    So, how can you justify your answer? You're saying that an entity, that exists only on paper, has the right to dictate what you do with your free time. So, without any law prohibiting it, this imaginary entity can make any demands it wants? So it would be fine to say that you cannot own guns as a condition of working at BOEING? Not bringing them into the office I can understand but disagree with.

    I thought that you could not really give up rights and that that there was not such thing as a valid contract that demanded a violation/surrender of rights.

    What about being forced to pay x% of your earnings to pay off your boss's boat, retirement, car, etc? Would that be legal? Like in a 1099, you make a sale, YOUR cut is 25% of total sale. Then your boss wants an extra X% of your cut to be able to get your pay check and he withholds that extra X%.



    Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  10. #10
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,886
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom1Man View Post
    So, how can you justify your answer? You're saying that an entity, that exists only on paper, has the right to dictate what you do with your free time. So, without any law prohibiting it, this imaginary entity can make any demands it wants? So it would be fine to say that you cannot own guns as a condition of working at BOEING? Not bringing them into the office I can understand but disagree with.

    I thought that you could not really give up rights and that that there was not such thing as a valid contract that demanded a violation/surrender of rights.

    What about being forced to pay x% of your earnings to pay off your boss's boat, retirement, car, etc? Would that be legal? Like in a 1099, you make a sale, YOUR cut is 25% of total sale. Then your boss wants an extra X% of your cut to be able to get your pay check and he withholds that extra X%.

    Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
    that entity, existing only on paper, has been given by the highest court in the land ~ personification.

    and you are now reaching by changing your original question of contractual employment and your 'off duty' rights.

    as skid states...if you agree for 'considerations' and contractually sign that agreement...guess you are out of rights and money and whatever else you sold your soul for.

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  11. #11
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,737
    Your employer??? What is that???? You have been conned into believing you are an employee. Who conned you into this concept? The federal government? Ask the IRS. According to them you are either employed or unemployed. Being employed is either being self-employed or employed by another, and in either case you are paying (directly or indirectly) a tax. Unemployed is the person receiving some assistance from the government. Tax/money transferred to the unemployed. Those not employed or unemployed don't exist as far as the government is concerned.

    At a young age I learned that my labor is my property. And I can contract to trade that property or any part of that property with others. Contracts are to equally benefit all parties to the contract. Anything happening outside the four corners of the contract has no effect on the contract. Anything outside the contract that interferes with the performance of the contract can effect the contract. Under the law no one can contract to perform an illegal act. And you can forfeit constitutional rights in a contract such as free speech for example.

    We contract for almost everything we do in our lives, but when it comes to a “job” we don't see it as an opportunity to contract. Well, I do. We even talk about the Prima Donnas and their sport contracts. What about your contract for your property?

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128
    Quote Originally Posted by color of law View Post
    Your employer??? What is that???? You have been conned into believing you are an employee. Who conned you into this concept? The federal government? Ask the IRS. According to them you are either employed or unemployed. Being employed is either being self-employed or employed by another, and in either case you are paying (directly or indirectly) a tax. Unemployed is the person receiving some assistance from the government. Tax/money transferred to the unemployed. Those not employed or unemployed don't exist as far as the government is concerned.

    At a young age I learned that my labor is my property. And I can contract to trade that property or any part of that property with others. Contracts are to equally benefit all parties to the contract. Anything happening outside the four corners of the contract has no effect on the contract. Anything outside the contract that interferes with the performance of the contract can effect the contract. Under the law no one can contract to perform an illegal act. And you can forfeit constitutional rights in a contract such as free speech for example.

    We contract for almost everything we do in our lives, but when it comes to a “job” we don't see it as an opportunity to contract. Well, I do. We even talk about the Prima Donnas and their sport contracts. What about your contract for your property?
    Look up "at-will employment." No need for a contract. No need for a breach. If they don't like your guns, your dope, the cut of your jib, whatever -- its "AMF" for you in most states. . . . That is unless you are a well-heeled executive with a "term contract of employment," or you work in a union shop with a due process right not to be terminated without "good cause."

    Don't like it? Start your own business, become a plutocrat or organize your workplace.

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128
    Or, you could always go work for the guvmint.

  14. #14
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom1Man View Post
    So, how can you justify your answer? You're saying that an entity, that exists only on paper, has the right to dictate what you do with your free time. So, without any law prohibiting it, this imaginary entity can make any demands it wants? So it would be fine to say that you cannot own guns as a condition of working at BOEING? Not bringing them into the office I can understand but disagree with.

    I thought that you could not really give up rights and that that there was not such thing as a valid contract that demanded a violation/surrender of rights.

    What about being forced to pay x% of your earnings to pay off your boss's boat, retirement, car, etc? Would that be legal? Like in a 1099, you make a sale, YOUR cut is 25% of total sale. Then your boss wants an extra X% of your cut to be able to get your pay check and he withholds that extra X%.



    Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
    Incorrect. What is being said is that an employer stipulates that the employee will not engage in certain activities in their free time as a condition of employment. Or even the employer stipulating that paying his car payments as a condition of employment. "As a condition of employment" means don't do what the employer says not to do or do what the employer says to do and keep your job. But if you do what the employer says not to do or do not do what the employers says to do then you lose your job.

    Or you can just not work for that employer.

    Still seems like liberty for both to me. Especially since there is no right to have a job nor is there any right to have a job without conditions of employment attached to that job.

    Now about that "giving up rights" thing. No rights are given up. All that is happening is an employee is agreeing (a contract) to not exercise his rights in ways the employer says are not acceptable in exchange for being paid wages and benefits.

    When a customer leaves his gun in the car and goes shopping in a business with a no guns rule then the customer is not giving up his right but is agreeing to not exercise his right in exchange for the ability to buy stuff.

    In effect the employer/business is offering a mutually agreed upon deal to the employee/customer where both get something of value from the other in exchange for agreed upon behavior.

    You cannot give up rights but you can either agree not to exercise them or be forced not to exercise them. One is your choice... the other is infringing.
    Last edited by Bikenut; 03-02-2016 at 03:23 PM.
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
    Incorrect. What is being said is that an employer stipulates that the employee will not engage in certain activities in their free time as a condition of employment. Or even the employer stipulating that paying his car payments as a condition of employment. "As a condition of employment" means don't do what the employer says not to do or do what the employer says to do and keep your job. But if you do what the employer says not to do or do not do what the employers says to do then you lose your job.

    Or you can just not work for that employer.

    Still seems like liberty for both to me. Especially since there is no right to have a job nor is there any right to have a job without conditions of employment attached to that job.

    Now about that "giving up rights" thing. No rights are given up. All that is happening is an employee is agreeing (a contract) to not exercise his rights in ways the employer says are not acceptable in exchange for being paid wages and benefits.

    When a customer leaves his gun in the car and goes shopping in a business with a no guns rule then the customer is not giving up his right but is agreeing to not exercise his right in exchange for the ability to buy stuff.

    In effect the employer/business is offering a mutually agreed upon deal to the employee/customer where both get something of value from the other in exchange for agreed upon behavior.

    You cannot give up rights but you can either agree not to exercise them or be forced not to exercise them. One is your choice... the other is infringing.
    The boat thing was about a 1099 job.

    But in a case of contract non1099 job, if you agree to pay me 10 per hour and at the end of 40 hour pay period the pay is less than 400$, how can that be legal, provided that there is no contract providing for pay being less than 10 per hour.

    Also, do you believe that the corporations should have the right to dictate what you do during your unpaid/personal time? Mind you I could think of a couple of limited jobs where that could be required. But about the adverage job, I could not see an allowance for that.

    Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  16. #16
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,886
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom1Man View Post
    The boat thing was about a 1099 job.

    But in a case of contract non1099 job, if you agree to pay me 10 per hour and at the end of 40 hour pay period the pay is less than 400$, how can that be legal, provided that there is no contract providing for pay being less than 10 per hour.

    Also, do you believe that the corporations should have the right to dictate what you do during your unpaid/personal time? Mind you I could think of a couple of limited jobs where that could be required. But about the adverage job, I could not see an allowance for that.

    Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
    freedom, happens all the time in fact, the horror stories i hear about those who work on the AK fishing boats is disgusting... those who sign on, agree to not receiving their full salary at the end of a specific period 18 months is the period have consistently heard about. further you are charged for your jackets, knives, and so forth and as long as you do not quit/get fired you will receive what was agreed upon minus jackets, knives, etc. if you get quit/get fired you get pennies on the dollar and in some cases not enough to get back to the continental states.

    the personal time has been address already...

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom1Man View Post
    So, how can you justify your answer? You're saying that an entity, that exists only on paper, has the right to dictate what you do with your free time. So, without any law prohibiting it, this imaginary entity can make any demands it wants? So it would be fine to say that you cannot own guns as a condition of working at BOEING? Not bringing them into the office I can understand but disagree with.

    I thought that you could not really give up rights and that that there was not such thing as a valid contract that demanded a violation/surrender of rights.

    What about being forced to pay x% of your earnings to pay off your boss's boat, retirement, car, etc? Would that be legal? Like in a 1099, you make a sale, YOUR cut is 25% of total sale. Then your boss wants an extra X% of your cut to be able to get your pay check and he withholds that extra X%.



    Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
    No, I am NOT saying that any entity has the right to dictate what you do with your free time. Please stop being childish in how you are responding and reacting to this.

    You and your potential employer have the right to negotiate the terms of your employment, and you have the right to accept or reject any term(s). You both also have the right to negotiate any modifications of the originally proposed terms. Neither has the right to force you to negotiate or to not negotiate.

    If you do not like the terms you can reject them and find employment elsewhere. It's your call.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  18. #18
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom1Man View Post
    The boat thing was about a 1099 job.

    But in a case of contract non1099 job, if you agree to pay me 10 per hour and at the end of 40 hour pay period the pay is less than 400$, how can that be legal, provided that there is no contract providing for pay being less than 10 per hour.

    Also, do you believe that the corporations should have the right to dictate what you do during your unpaid/personal time? Mind you I could think of a couple of limited jobs where that could be required. But about the adverage job, I could not see an allowance for that.

    Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
    When accepting employment did you agree that you would be liable for any equipment/supplies or damages to equipment/supplies as a condition of being employed? If so then the employer took that out of your $400. And it is legal because you agreed to it as a condition of employment when you took the job. Please bear in mind that there is such a thing as a verbal agreement being legally binding.

    So... if you and I are talking about a job and I say you will have to pay for any equipment/supplies necessary to do the job and you will have to pay for any equipment/supplies you damage and you say you will take the job then I get to take the value of that equipment/supplies out of your $400..... because you agreed to it.

    Has nothing to do with rights and has everything to do with what you agreed to as a condition of employment. And if you happen to spend more than your wages of $400 on equipment/supplies or do damage costing more than $400 then you made a bad deal and get no wages.

    As I said before liberty for both is the employer imposing conditions for employment and you refusing to work for that employer because of those conditions.
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  19. #19
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
    When accepting employment did you agree that you would be liable for any equipment/supplies or damages to equipment/supplies as a condition of being employed? If so then the employer took that out of your $400. And it is legal because you agreed to it as a condition of employment when you took the job. Please bear in mind that there is such a thing as a verbal agreement being legally binding.

    So... if you and I are talking about a job and I say you will have to pay for any equipment/supplies necessary to do the job and you will have to pay for any equipment/supplies you damage and you say you will take the job then I get to take the value of that equipment/supplies out of your $400..... because you agreed to it.

    Has nothing to do with rights and has everything to do with what you agreed to as a condition of employment. And if you happen to spend more than your wages of $400 on equipment/supplies or do damage costing more than $400 then you made a bad deal and get no wages.

    As I said before liberty for both is the employer imposing conditions for employment and you refusing to work for that employer because of those conditions.
    Not referring to damages, assuming tasks were preformed to satisfaction. No special purchase equipment, damages, etc.

    ------------

    Now since you can be denied work/fired for exercising rights.

    Why is it that we cannot refuse to hire or fire for race, religion, gender, etc?

    Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  20. #20
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom1Man View Post
    Originally Posted by Bikenut

    When accepting employment did you agree that you would be liable for any equipment/supplies or damages to equipment/supplies as a condition of being employed? If so then the employer took that out of your $400. And it is legal because you agreed to it as a condition of employment when you took the job. Please bear in mind that there is such a thing as a verbal agreement being legally binding.

    So... if you and I are talking about a job and I say you will have to pay for any equipment/supplies necessary to do the job and you will have to pay for any equipment/supplies you damage and you say you will take the job then I get to take the value of that equipment/supplies out of your $400..... because you agreed to it.

    Has nothing to do with rights and has everything to do with what you agreed to as a condition of employment. And if you happen to spend more than your wages of $400 on equipment/supplies or do damage costing more than $400 then you made a bad deal and get no wages.

    As I said before liberty for both is the employer imposing conditions for employment and you refusing to work for that employer because of those conditions.

    Not referring to damages, assuming tasks were preformed to satisfaction. No special purchase equipment, damages, etc.

    ------------

    Now since you can be denied work/fired for exercising rights.

    Why is it that we cannot refuse to hire or fire for race, religion, gender, etc?

    Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
    If the tasks were performed to the employers satisfaction without any debits for equipment or damages then you should be paid the agreed upon $400. But bear in mind we are talking about what the employer pays you and not what the government takes from you in taxes. Those taxes have nothing to do with your employer and your complaint would be with the government.

    A person is NOT denied work but is given the choice to either agree to the conditions of employment or to seek employment elsewhere where the person likes the conditions of employment. No one is denying anyone any work... just providing work according to the employee agreeing to the conditions of employment.

    A person is NOT fired for exercising their rights. The person is fired for not adhering to the conditions of employment that they agreed to when they accepted employment.

    The reason we cannot refuse to hire or fire due to race, religion, gender, etc., is because the government imposed laws that infringe upon the property owner's private property rights. Bear in mind that a business most certainly IS private property.
    Last edited by Bikenut; 03-02-2016 at 06:42 PM.
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  21. #21
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,737
    Quote Originally Posted by The Donkey View Post
    Look up "at-will employment." No need for a contract. No need for a breach. If they don't like your guns, your dope, the cut of your jib, whatever -- its "AMF" for you in most states. . . . That is unless you are a well-heeled executive with a "term contract of employment," or you work in a union shop with a due process right not to be terminated without "good cause."

    Don't like it? Start your own business, become a plutocrat or organize your workplace.
    Apparently you did not read what I wrote. Where did I ever suggest you put yourself in the position of being an employee or employer? And why would you suggest that only certain persons are eligible to contract, such as a well-heeled executives or a union workers. So what you are saying is all others are out of luck and have no worth? Or they are only worth what that employer offers to pay a slave an employee. In other words, you accept the premise that you are either an employee or employer, and not a contractor.

    What is great about this country is you get to believe whatever you want.

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128
    Quote Originally Posted by color of law View Post
    Apparently you did not read what I wrote. Where did I ever suggest you put yourself in the position of being an employee or employer? And why would you suggest that only certain persons are eligible to contract, such as a well-heeled executives or a union workers. So what you are saying is all others are out of luck and have no worth? Or they are only worth what that employer offers to pay a slave an employee. In other words, you accept the premise that you are either an employee or employer, and not a contractor.

    What is great about this country is you get to believe whatever you want.
    My friend, I am telling you what the law is, not political theory.

    You technically have a contract of employment as an at will employee. It is terminable by either party for any reason, or for no reason at all, with a few rather clearly defined exceptions. Guns and dope are not among them.

    You can work under a contract without an employment relationship. If there is no fixed term, your contract will likely also be considered "at will." If that is the case, the person you contract with can dismiss you just as unceremoneously. You will be self employed for workers comp, tax, wage and hours, liability, and other purposes. Most people have less rights and benefits that way, but if your services are in particular demand, and a good negotiator, it is possible that you may be able to make up for that. Most workers are not so blessed. In certain situations, the government will not allow a business to treat you as a contractor, only an employee. That is to protect you against getting ripped off and exploited by your employer.

    Not judging -- that is the black letter law.

  23. #23
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,737
    Quote Originally Posted by The Donkey View Post
    My friend, I am telling you what the law is, not political theory.

    You technically have a contract of employment as an at will employee. It is terminable by either party for any reason, or for no reason at all, with a few rather clearly defined exceptions. Guns and dope are not among them.

    You can work under a contract without an employment relationship. If there is no fixed term, your contract will likely also be considered "at will." If that is the case, the person you contract with can dismiss you just as unceremoneously. You will be self employed for workers comp, tax, wage and hours, liability, and other purposes. Most people have less rights and benefits that way, but if your services are in particular demand, and a good negotiator, it is possible that you may be able to make up for that. Most workers are not so blessed. In certain situations, the government will not allow a business to treat you as a contractor, only an employee. That is to protect you against getting ripped off and exploited by your employer.

    Not judging -- that is the black letter law.
    First off your premise that's the law versus political theory demonstrates your ignorance. The constitution doesn't allow states to interfere with contracts, only interpret their terms in a dispute.
    "At will" is not a contract. "At will" is based on statutory law because a contract does not exist. And without a contract the law assumes (pretends) there is an employer employee relationship. Contracts set their own terms and conditions, and defines those terms and conditions.

    Secondly, it is not a contract if there is not some fixed terms and conditions. Contracts require a beginning and ending. In other words a contract cannot be perpetual. "At will" has a beginning but no set ending, hence not a contract.

    Lastly, you have been conditioned to exist in this world (put food on the table) by having to enter into an employer employee relationship. Not true. What I wrote was about contracting. Because contracting does not have to involve an assumed employer employee relationship. These types of private contracts are entered into everyday. And because they are private neither you nor the gov. know they even exist.

    And I'm talking from experience. Just say'n.....

  24. #24
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
    If the tasks were performed to the employers satisfaction without any debits for equipment or damages then you should be paid the agreed upon $400. But bear in mind we are talking about what the employer pays you and not what the government takes from you in taxes. Those taxes have nothing to do with your employer and your complaint would be with the government.

    A person is NOT denied work but is given the choice to either agree to the conditions of employment or to seek employment elsewhere where the person likes the conditions of employment. No one is denying anyone any work... just providing work according to the employee agreeing to the conditions of employment.

    A person is NOT fired for exercising their rights. The person is fired for not adhering to the conditions of employment that they agreed to when they accepted employment.

    The reason we cannot refuse to hire or fire due to race, religion, gender, etc., is because the government imposed laws that infringe upon the property owner's private property rights. Bear in mind that a business most certainly IS private property.
    There are no laws requiring any taxes to withheld from earnings.

    Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  25. #25
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    You and your potential employer have the right to negotiate the terms of your employment, and you have the right to accept or reject any term(s). You both also have the right to negotiate any modifications of the originally proposed terms. Neither has the right to force you to negotiate or to not negotiate.

    If you do not like the terms you can reject them and find employment elsewhere. It's your call.

    stay safe.
    Well said.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •