Interesting Links for 26-06-2014

[andrewducker]

• Everyone is totally just winging it, all the time
  (tags: people life politics competency adult )
• The war on drugs is lost - legalise the heroin trade
  (tags: heroin drugs legalisation )
• Investment Strategies in a Post-Apocalyptic World
  (tags: zombies investment apocalypse )
• I believe we're getting some of these in the office
  (tags: aliens coffee

Comments

[bart_calendar]

We have different business jargon in the US but is an "0 hours exclusivity clause" the same as a "no work non compete clause?" If so they can be very beneficial.

For example last summer my main client realized that a massive IT change his company was going to go through meant that he wouldn't have work for me in the month of August (because he didn't need new ads for new sites until the IT change was done and he could upload new sites.)

But, he didn't want to lose me to his competitors. So, he offered me 80 percent of my usual monthly charges to him if I would agree to not work for anyone else during that month that could even vaguely be considered a competitor.

I took the offer right away. If I hadn't I would have had to spend four or five hours a day every day just trying to land short term freelance jobs and probably have gotten about half as much as he usually pays me (and might have gotten even less than that.)

On the other hand with the 80 percent pay up front and no work, I was able to travel to Paris to see one of my lovers, spend many days sitting on the beach and generally just chill out.

Meanwhile my client had the assurance that come the first week in September I'd be sitting in the chair writing for him again.

Nobody lost out.

[randomchris]

It's similar in effect - but completely unpaid. The exclusivity clause means that you only get paid for the hours you work.

I'd be fine with an exclusivity clause if it had, say, a 20-hour minimum (even in weeks you don't work you get 20 hours pay) but the ones being banned here don't have any minimum pay. People are getting zero work and zero pay, and not being allowed to look for work elsewhere.

[bart_calendar]

Oh. Ok. That sucks!

I couldn't tell from the article what it meant and was trying to reason it out and no work non compete retainers seemed to be what it meant but I couldn't be sure.

Thanks!

[a_pawson]

In the UK a zero hours contract means you are employed by a company but they do not guarantee you any work. Essentially they tell you the day before whether there is any work or not the following day. Having a non-compete clause in there as well means if they decide not to give you any work then you are fucked as you can't go and work for anyone else either.

[bart_calendar]

Wow. That does suck. Thanks!

And sorry for my ignorance!

Translating business jargon is not always easy.

[andrewducker]

Nothing wrong with being ignorant of business jargon in other countries!

(Especially when the term only became prevalent in the last ten years - and I only heard of it in the last three!)

[bart_calendar]

You are very kind. Thank you.

[cartesiandaemon]

Now I think about it, what's wrong with zero hour contracts isn't zero hour contracts. If someone wants to offer me work on zero notice, that's fine. What ISN'T fine is if they expect ME to always say "yes, I'm free", while THEY say "sorry, nothing today".

[andrewducker]

Yeah, it's the one-sidedness that's the issue.

And the fact that claiming benefits while working irregular hours is a massive pain.

Get the universal benefits system working, and stop the one-sidedness and the system, while not great, will not be quite so appalling.