CurtEastPoint
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-03-10 08:55 AM
Original message |
'Waive your right to a jury trial...' How can a company require this? |
|
Is this legal? I guess it must be. In my job search, I just saw an app for a large national company and the last page is that waiver. You HAVE to sign it or too bad:
This Agreement does not prevent you from filing charges with administrative agencies such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission or the National Labor Relations Board or equivalent state agencies. This Agreement does not take away any of your rights to sue or to seek all of the types of remedies the law allows. It simply provides that a judge will decide any differences that cannot be resolved through the Company’s internal complaint resolution procedures. By signing this Agreement, you waive your right to request or demand a jury trial with respect to any claims under federal or state law (to the extent permitted by the law of the state in which you may be employed) that you may assert against XXXX Corporation, its affiliates, subsidiaries, divisions, successors, assigns, purchasers, and/or its current, former, and future employees, shareholders, officers, directors and agents (“the Company”). This includes, but is not limited to, claims relating in any manner to your application for employment, your employment (and any of its terms or conditions), or your separation from employment with the Company.
|
FreakinDJ
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-03-10 09:02 AM
Response to Original message |
|
Which means even thou it is NOT LEGAL they will attempt to enforce it upon you waving it in front of the judge. Any respectable Judge would immediately toss it out.
"Did you sign the form?
"Eer Yes, I was afraid they wouldn't hire me unless I did"
|
elleng
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-03-10 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
4. It is NOT 'not legal,' its considered an adhesion contract, wherein |
|
one side has all the bargaining power and uses it to write the contract primarily to his or her advantage.
They are fairly common, as in 'Take it or leave it,' and there's nothing shameful about signing one. Just be aware of all the relevant issues.
|
FreakinDJ
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-03-10 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
10. My lawer told me they don't hold up in court |
|
and hence the interpretation I was given
|
elleng
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-03-10 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
12. Probably good advice generally, MOST never get into court; VERY common, tho. |
|
Edited on Fri Dec-03-10 10:55 AM by elleng
Not 'thrown out' because they're 'not legal,' but probably due to evidence of undue pressure to sign/agree, lack of full disclosure, or somesuch.
|
Me.
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-03-10 09:10 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Shouldn't You Be Telling Us Which Company? |
sinkingfeeling
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-03-10 09:25 AM
Response to Original message |
3. I've seen that before. Standard paragraph for excepting 'early retirement', in an attempt that |
|
older employees being forced out wouldn't sue for age discrimination. Lawyers say to sign it, but ignore it.
|
elleng
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-03-10 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
6. Lawyers shouldn't say sign it but ignore it, |
|
but should say you can sign it if you think you can live with the particular 'obnoxious' (my term) aspect.
|
sinkingfeeling
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-03-10 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
13. No, I was advised to sign the document and then to pursue a lawsuit |
|
anyway. Not only did I join the class-action suit, but we won.
|
elleng
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-03-10 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
14. Good (and unusual!) Company? Issues? |
sinkingfeeling
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-03-10 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
15. IBM. The Cooper case. Age discrimination in 'resource actions'. |
elleng
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-03-10 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
kenny blankenship
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-03-10 09:40 AM
Response to Original message |
5. "Inalienable rights" are for corporate persons. Any rights you may have are negotiable. |
elleng
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-03-10 09:44 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
7. This is private contract between individuals, this is NOT about government |
|
affecting 'rights.' You have the right to think about whether you're better off signing or not signing, and do what you think suits your needs best.
|
kenny blankenship
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-03-10 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
8. So, do you think ppl could hypothetically sell themselves into slavery, through a signed contract? |
|
Edited on Fri Dec-03-10 09:56 AM by kenny blankenship
Or does the phrase inalienable right actually have a meaning, like a right that can neither be taken away nor given away, no matter what pieces of paper were signed?
Maybe you should reflect on the term "inalienable right" some more. (And no, I'm not going to be impressed by a degree from a law school. Reflect some more.)
|
elleng
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-03-10 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
FreakinDJ
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-03-10 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
11. Like the papers you sign to join the military |
OrwellwasRight
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Dec-05-10 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
|
Contracts to to sell yourself (or another person), contracts to kill a person, etc. are all null and void the minute they are signed because they are against the public good. This is a long-standing provision of contract law: that certain things are beyond your right to contract because they are so heinous to the public good.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri May 03rd 2024, 07:27 PM
Response to Original message |