Employee Works For Both Google and Facebook From Home (twitter.com) 112
Michael Arrington, who founded TechCrunch and is now a VC, shares an interesting story: A friend of a friend at Google interviewed at Facebook right as the virus hit. Accepted new job in March. Didn't quit old job. Apparently does both jobs at home in 55 hours/week. Neither company knows yet. Might have reversed the co's, not sure. I have so many thoughts on this. Interesting discussion (Twitter thread).
Well... (Score:5, Insightful)
Do both companies get what they pay for?
If yes, then no problem. If no, then problem.
Re: (Score:1)
You are in really time do do if you clocked in at both companies at the same time.
Re:Well... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Well... (Score:4, Informative)
If you collect a salary, then simply logging into check your email is considered a work act and your employer is required to pay you for a full day. Your employer is also not required to keep you employed and can terminate you for any reason.
This does not apply to hourly workers
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Well... (Score:4, Informative)
What the law states for salary employees.
"An employer must pay an exempt employee the full predetermined salary amount "free and clear" for any week in which the employee performs any work without regard to the number of days or hours worked. However, there is no requirement that the predetermined salary be paid if the employee performs no work for an entire workweek. Deductions may not be made from the employee's predetermined salary for absences occasioned by the employer or by the operating requirements of the business. If the employee is ready, willing, and able to work, deductions may not be made for time when work is not available. Salary deductions are generally not permissible if the employee works less than a full day. Except for certain limited exceptions found in 29 C.F.R. 541.602(b)(1)-(7) , salary deductions result in loss of the section 13(a)(1) exemption."
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/w... [dol.gov]
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/w... [dol.gov]
Re:Well... (Score:5, Insightful)
Depending on the jurisdiction, in most cases, trying to stipulate where someone can or can't otherwise make a living is difficult to enforce. In many many jurisdictions courts have narrowed a contract's ability to limit your employability. Even non-compete contracts have a hard time nowadays.
If this person is misrepresenting the amount of time being spent to either employer, then this is grounds for termination. But if the person is salaried, and if both employers are happy with the person's productivity, then why not? Salaried positions have typically meant you spend as many hours as it takes to get the job done. I can't see how why this shouldn't cut both ways.
Re: (Score:2)
Well because usually there is more exception than just X untis of output from you. Professional jobs are often about enabling others to be productive as well.
Some of that comes down to simply being available. If I can't take a meeting, am not available to assist a coworker etc when they message me my employer is losing out. If the reason I can't do those things is because I am doing other higher priority work for them at the time that is one thing, but if its because I am doing something for a completely
Re: (Score:3)
This isn't a matter of an exclusivity contract or doing contracted project work, this is someone who was hired as a full-time salaried employee for two jobs at the same time. It's entirely reasonable for an employer to expect that if they're paying you for a full day's work, you're engaged and working for them the full 8-hour day. If he's doing two jobs, essentially giving each one half-time, he's not giving either company what they're paying him for, and should expect to be fired when they find out. If he
Re:Well... (Score:5, Informative)
This is SOOooo incorrect based on the law. Oh how the companies have confused us.
If they are salary and exempt status meaning no overtime.
"A salary is a predetermined amount constituting all or part of the employee's compensation, which is not subject to reduction because of variations in the quality or quantity of the work performed. Beginning January 1, 2020, employers may use nondiscretionary bonuses and incentive payments (including commissions) paid on an annual or more frequent basis, to satisfy up to 10 percent of the standard salary level.
An employer must pay an exempt employee the full predetermined salary amount "free and clear" for any week in which the employee performs any work without regard to the number of days or hours worked. However, there is no requirement that the predetermined salary be paid if the employee performs no work for an entire workweek. Deductions may not be made from the employee's predetermined salary for absences occasioned by the employer or by the operating requirements of the business. If the employee is ready, willing, and able to work, deductions may not be made for time when work is not available. Salary deductions are generally not permissible if the employee works less than a full day. Except for certain limited exceptions found in 29 C.F.R. 541.602(b)(1)-(7) , salary deductions result in loss of the section 13(a)(1) exemption."
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/w... [dol.gov]
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
That's intended to protect someone from getting salary suspended if they're injured, take vacation, etc., not that people can expect to do nothing and get paid anyway...
non-compete are very limited in CA (Score:2)
non-compete are very limited in CA
Re: (Score:3)
Either or both companies may withdraw employment for this. Salaried employees are at-will in California (and most other jurisdictions). There is no special case that I'm aware of where this isn't binding.
Even California's ban on non-compete clauses for regular employees is specifically to prevent non-compete agreements (NCA) from extending beyond the duration of employment. (there are exception to this, that aren't related). During employment, as far as I know, those kind of agreements are still valid and t
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, either company can fire him. And should be able to. But if you can deal with the constant 60 hour weeks, it may be worth it to someone to try. The risk is getting black listed at the company(s) that catch you, and probably doing a mediocre job at both. The upside is a lot of money in the meantime. If you bank that extra cash, you could come out ahead. And if you're not on competing projects, I wouldn't see it as an ethical dillema.
Now I wouldn't do it because I have 0 desire to work that hard.
Re: (Score:2)
If there is bonus or equity at both and you can hang on long enough for some of it to vest, then it could be huge. I think Google's RSUs start vesting nearly immediately or the quarter after you are hired. While most companies make you wait a year for your first vest, and four years for the full amount.
I think if someone wants to work 60 hours a week they could become a doctor in their own practice, or start their own business. But if someone wants to slack off and do poorly at two jobs while collecting dou
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I also find it hard to prove in court exclusive dedication to an employer during the duration of the contract. That makes a hobby, improving your personal webpage or watering your plants a potential breach of that exclusive dedication if you don't ask for permission?
The problem is that the employer is paying for X amount of hours, while the other hours are yours. How can any employer say what you can or cannot do with that time they are not paying you for?
Re: (Score:2)
How can any employer say what you can or cannot do with that time they are not paying you for?
It's considered legal for companies to restrict what you can do outside of your job, under certain conditions. Working a second job is one of those things that can be restricted, as long as it's clearly laid out in their policies.
Re: (Score:2)
Having a clause in a contract doesn't make it legal, nor signing absurd and possibly illegal clauses on a contract makes them legal for the fact of signing the contract.
True, but does he have the money to fight both companies in court to get the clause declared illegal.. probably not. And besides, there is probably some other
legal clause in the contracts that they can get him for.
Re:Well... (Score:5, Interesting)
Know of a fun case where the individual (contractor) held two jobs ... same company, same tower. Got in real early, worked like crazy, went up to the other floor ~10:00, made his presence known, bounced between the two floors for a few hours, then finished off the day at the second job. Worked 6:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. ... and pulled it off successfully for three months, till someone finally clued in, and he was summarily fired. Sad thing is that he was one of the best devs in both groups. And both managers wanted to keep him. But yeah, he was only putting in six hours - total - for each job.
Re: (Score:3)
I remember that from one of Scott Adams' books, like The Dilbert Principle or one of those others he wrote a long while back. It included a lot of emails he received from people describing humorous work situations. That's one that stuck with me.
Re: (Score:2)
Usually that's not enforceable (generically)...
But the bigger risk is the fact that depending on the role, you are basically working for the competition (as far as the other company is concerned).. THAT is the risk and the area that may be legally actionable depending on what the terms are and what he's doing. Working for say rackspace and facebook are two "different" companies in two different lines of business (if anything facebook would be a customer of facebook).. but given what facebook and google do..
Re: (Score:2)
but one can be fired for not cause.
so i sell pot.
f them all
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Do both companies get what they pay for?
If yes, then no problem. If no, then problem.
Not if this person works in HR or PR.
If I worked in HR or PR, I could have 10 -TEN-jobs!
Re: (Score:3)
Do both companies get what they pay for?
If yes, then no problem. If no, then problem.
Where I would generally agree, if the companies require him to notify them of any possible conflicts of interest or outside jobs or businesses, he may be in violation of his employment agreements for one or more of these companies.
So, very likely a problem here.
Collecting two paychecks though is kind of nice. I did that once, when I got laid off and my severance package included getting paid a week's worth of salary for every year of employment. I had a new job right away so I got 12 weeks of overlappi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Frankly it's amazing (reading through the Twitter thread) that people are so up in arms over people working two jobs. I'm technically working four jobs right now, though my zero-hour-a-week martial arts class (thanks, Coronavirus) isn't really impacting my ability to do work on the other ones.
Working multiple jobs is a long standing American tradition to get some extra money. There's nothing shady about it as long as he doesn't share secrets across company boundaries.
The question is location (Score:4, Interesting)
If he is located anywhere other than California .. he is in violation of non-compete clauses in both employment contracts.
Re: (Score:3)
For those type of jobs where a non-compete would even apply. Anyway, mine was not working for our competitors, BUT I couldn't be prevented from working in my field for someone else.
Re: (Score:3)
That's not what a non-compete is. You're thinking of an exclusivity clause. In order for it to violate a non-compete the employee must be providing value to a competitor of the company.
Re: (Score:2)
Google and Facebook are competitors.
In fact, as mergers and acquisitions and lateral growth run rampant, more and more of the remaining companies are direct competitors over time.
Speaking of mergers and acquisitions, what happens when one of your employers swallows the other...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is very dependent on the state in question and can even vary judge to judge in states where they are enforced. I was sued under a non-compete in Kansas, they are enforced (or were at the time) in Kansas like most contracts with only things like duration and geographic factors being limited by law.
HOWEVER - If you have a non-compete and you are thinking about violating it... I don't care where you live, my advice is to consult a local lawyer and have them read the agreement and explain to you what the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Have you ever actually signed an employment contract? I have never even seen one in the 40+ years I've been working at various jobs.
Yes, twice.. Got sued once..
I won't sign another one, unless it meant starving myself or the family. I'm not going to get sued again.
Re: (Score:2)
Hah, yes, once. A place wanted me to work for them, but didn't want to hire me on an a regular employee, so sent me to a place to be a "contractor". The contracting place had a very long contract. I crossed out almost all of it (non-compete, intellectual property, etc.), signed it, and turned it back in. They paper pusher was like, "I don't think we can accept that." I told him, "I really don't need you, I can just go to another place." I guess they talked to the place that wanted to have me working f
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I get a contract with every job, and I've changed the IP clauses.
I don't bother with the non-competes as they have no legitimacy in UK law.
Re: (Score:2)
If he is located anywhere other than California .. he is in violation of non-compete clauses in both employment contracts.
But he may be violating the conflicts of interest reporting requirement which is likely a condition of his employment at both companies. I believe they can insist on you eliminating any conflicts of interest they decide is required to maintain your job.
In short, He's risking getting fired, with cause, by one or both of the companies for failure to disclose conflicts of interest. This has nothing to do with a non-compete agreements, or the laws of California.
Hard to believe... What about meeting conflicts? (Score:4, Interesting)
WFH doesn't mean working in isolation. There are training weeks, regular team meetings, planning seasons... This wouldn't last too long.
Re: (Score:2)
"I have a... client meeting" "I have a personal appointment" "I have a frequent conflict at time x, can we have this daily meeting at y instead?"
I don't do this, but I'm innundated with enough meetings that generally for a given time slot there are conflicts within my same employee. If I tell each party that I attended the other's meeting, they won't be bothering each other so long as I make sure I don't let either party twist in the wind much.
I could easily imagine waving off meetings if I had to and getti
Re: (Score:2)
This would definitely be impressive if he kept it up for a year or more. But I'm pretty sure most of us could fool two employers for a few months without anyone being too suspicious, especially given the pandemic.
The issue is then losing two jobs, not one, in a very uncertain economic climate.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly this. I knew a guy who worked for IBM Global Services and then later got a job with EMC Professional Services. He worked both jobs (poorly) for 3 months until both jobs asked him to be on-site at the same time (in different states), and then he quit the IBM job.
It's unethical as all get out, regardless of whether or not it's legal.
Re: (Score:2)
The only ethical obligation I see him as failing was the performance.
I have had a fair few jobs where I could do in 10 hours what my colleagues took 30-40 to accomplish. So I put in 20, gave them more than they were hoping for, and put the other 20 to use for myself.
I owe my employer productivity, not time. Once I have fulfilled that obligation, what I do with the rest of the time is (literally) none of their business.
On rare occasions I have had bosses that disagreed with me on this point. (I didn't mainta
Re: (Score:3)
It could be done, especially with time zones. The number of hours worked is suspect, but if you can get the job done, it's fine.
Legally, by itself it isn't a problem. LOTS of people have multiple jobs, either a day job plus moonlighting on the side, or two or more part time jobs. While less common in technology and professional fields it is quite common to for people to get a side job doing things like night janitor or flipping burgers or whatever.
As long as the person manages to get their jobs done with
Re: (Score:2)
What about meeting conflicts? No seriously what about them? I work for a single employer and have meeting conflicts on a daily basis. You prioritise, tell the loser of the prioritisation you have something more important on. Unless that meeting is with your boss chances are that is a decision that is up to you to make.
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, so easy to deal with meeting conflicts the same as personal appointments. You block out your calendar for the times you've already got booked.
Not agreeing or disagreeing with what the OP is doing, but one could easily start one shift at 6am "east coast" time and the other job 9am "pacific coast" time (6 hour difference) and pull it off blocking out lunch time in the middle for the opposite, but never taking lunch. The trick would be as soon as you had a meeting with one job would be to block out your
Re: (Score:2)
Even so, I would imagine that at some point you're going to have an all-hands-on-deck crisis meeting or whatever hit both jobs at the same time, or something like that. I figure you might be able to get away with it for some time, but eventually there will be a situation where you just can't be two places at once and it's going to be a problem.
Gee, didn't see that one coming (Score:4, Insightful)
In the office, if I get in 2-6 hours of focused coding a day, I'm doing great. Sometimes on a Sat, I can get in an 8 hour run. There is room in there to have two, high paying jobs... I'd be surprised if more people aren't double dipping.
On the downside, it takes a few hours a day listing to the sales guys, product managers, PhD quants, etc. to keep an eye on the big picture.
Re:Gee, didn't see that one coming (Score:4, Interesting)
If you are left to your own devices, this is great. Lots of interactive meetings can kill this scheme off, but loads of presentations you can mentally skip are perfect - attend, but do your other work. But some things you need to listen to, to do the job. This guy is probably doing 15 hours of worky-work for each employer, and 12 hours each of meetings. And 10 more hours he isn't admitting to.
I find 2 hours of good focused work can be a very productive day. 6 hours can let you catch up a week of goofing off (or feeling ill and unfocused). This is enough to get good reviews if you are effective during these focused periods.
I'm certain it will catch up with him, but if he can pull it off for another 6 months and invest that wage he'll have pretty much saved a year or two of work via early retirement.
Re: (Score:2)
thanks slashdot (Score:5, Insightful)
this isnt even an article. are you kidding me? we're not using twitter threads as articles? someone delete this fucking garbage
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:thanks slashdot (Score:5, Funny)
Lighten up. the editors must all have day jobs. This is their side gig. They are meeting the expectations, so win!
Besides, this article resonates with them editors...
Re: (Score:3)
the editors must all have day jobs.
Stop trying to humanise Slashdot's AI* scripts.
* AI being the marketing term Artificial Intelligence, and should in no way be misconstrued to mean that msmash isn't in fact a poorly coded Perl script that simply accepts any old submission made to the site.
Re: thanks slashdot (Score:2)
Even the AIs have day jobs. /. Istheir side gig.
Re: (Score:2)
this isnt even an article. are you kidding me? we're not using twitter threads as articles? someone delete this fucking garbage
It's how the media now gets their news.. They watch what is trending on Twitter. Problem is they believe everything they see on Twitter too.
So... (Score:5, Insightful)
..he's one of the 13 Million people with multiple jobs and we should care why?
FB & Google care (Score:5, Interesting)
And also employers like to think of us a property, and if you're working for somebody else that's practically stealing.
Re: (Score:3)
"because the IP he's creating might not belong solely to them. "
There no such thing, it's a sham.
Re: (Score:2)
And also employers like to think of us a property, and if you're working for somebody else that's practically stealing.
You wouldn't download an employer.
Violates FB code of conduct unless pre-approved (Score:4, Informative)
This arrangement violates FB code of conduct unless it was approved. Google has a similar code of conduct
Facebook code of conduct:
https://investor.fb.com/corpor... [fb.com]
Outside Business and Consulting Engagements
Facebook Personnel must obtain approval from the Conflicts Committee via the online tool prior to (1) beginning any employment, business, or consulting relationship with another company that is a current or potential competitor of Facebook or that otherwise has a business relationship with Facebook, or (2) accepting any teaching engagements with an educational institution, establishment, or other organization. In addition, you should avoid conducting Facebook business with members of your family or others with whom you have a significant personal or financial relationship without the prior approval of the Conflicts Committee.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for pointing what part of the Code of Conduct of Facebook is SO illegal that they should be demanded.
You can be working for them in coding for an app and be doing teaching engagement with a public library to teach origami.
The Code of Conduct forbids it.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for pointing what part of the Code of Conduct of Facebook is SO illegal that they should be demanded.
You can be working for them in coding for an app and be doing teaching engagement with a public library to teach origami.
The Code of Conduct forbids it.
There is nothing illegal in this code of conduct. It doesn't outright prohibit anything.
It says employees must pre-clear outside interests with the conflicts committee.
You are delusional if you don't think there is such a thing as conflicts of interest. Some of them can even lead to civil or criminal liabilities for your employer.
Re: (Score:2)
Quote: "You are delusional if you don't think there is such a thing as conflicts of interest."
Answer: You're the one delusional if you think you have to ask for permission if you want to do another job. That's illegal.
Another thing is if two of them are on the same category BUT the Code of Conducts says YOU HAVE TO ASK WHATEVER WORK IS. And that, my dear non-reader, IS ILLEGAL.
You really have no perspective at all. Here is one example of a definite conflict of interest that can have legal and civil repercussions
(1) I work for Goldman Sachs in Asset Management, investing client money
(2) I simultaneously work in sales for a hedge fund seeking client investments
Both companies will have compliance departments and outside interest boards to which such a situation must be reported. I will definitely have to leave one of these companies because the conflict of interest exists regardle
Re: (Score:2)
Quote: "You really have no perspective at all."
Answer: You really DON'T READ what I wrote. So, why to waste my time talking to a wall?
I read it but it was incoherent
Re: (Score:2)
Incoherent? I'm truly sorry, you troll, but at least I do know that sentences end with a DOT.
Unsurprisingly you know less than you think you do.
Sentences end with a period. A period looks like a dot.
May I suggest you read up on the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have even worked a second job once above board by going to my companies management to approve me doing it. They didn't care how I used my 'spare' time, once they established that by doing this job I wasn't:
-Helping a competitor do work that would go against their products and services
-That I wasn't providing a service that would compete with a service they would reasonably provide (e.g. they charge X amount to have me do work for a customer, I can't go to same customer and offer to work direct for X-15%)
You Can work at mcdonald's and burger king (Score:2)
work at mcdonald's and burger king at the same time.
Re: (Score:2)
work at mcdonald's and burger king at the same time.
Are you sure about that?
McDonald's code of conduct
https://corporate.mcdonalds.co... [mcdonalds.com]
Burger King
https://secure.efficientforms.... [efficientforms.com]
Anyone truly focused could do this... (Score:2)
If you don't goof off on the internet, phone, etc, then anyone (without external responsibilities - children, family, etc) could do this do an 'acceptable' standard, as long as you can avoid meeting collisions (so this can work for programmers, but not their managers).
Covid is a perfect time to do this, you're not losing anything, and doomscrolling the news is counterproductive anyway, so best find something to avoid it.
Sure, it breaches the employers' code of conduct - if one finds out then his long-term j
A step further (Score:3)
A few years ago, a Dev went a step further with this, by outsourcing his job (https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-21043693)
Re: (Score:2)
A few years ago, a Dev went a step further with this, by outsourcing his job (https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-21043693)
Now that's ingenious.. Outsource your own work to low paid offshore developers and pocket the difference. Well, right up to the point where he got caught and lost his job.
Rinse Lather and repeat until your tax bracket gets too high.
If they don't know by now (Score:1)
Mixed feelings (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's a lot of doomsayers that seem to think he could be sued. I'm inclined to think the worst thing that could happen is he gets fired from both jobs, possibly for cause, and gets zero unemployment, they might even try to revoke 401k contributions or other similar.
I only see him getting sued if he created or worked on overlapping technology at both companies and imperiled their patents or IP exclusivity. That kind of thing would cost real money to both companies. But I'd wager if he was able to pull t
Short sighted (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
- Clever at finding loopholes in the rules
- Has the guts to act unethically when there are significant advantage to gain and the chance of getting caught is relatively small
- Favors short-term gains over long-term gains and stability
My guess is this person will be a CxO within five years.
Tomorrows headline (Score:3)
10/1/2025 [Employee name] Was fired from both Google and Facebook today when it was discovered that he was working as the CIO of both companies.
Re: (Score:2)
First thing he would have done is to make sure all google searches about him return only positive results by messing the page rank tables
Then used internal facebook tools to make sure two different profiles are shown and the whole world thinks there are two people with the same name and different job profiles.
That would be far sighted, not near sighted.
Who Owns the Employee's Output & IP? (Score:2)
My first thought was good on the employee, but then looking back at the contracts I've had over the years, I've had employers that say that *everything* I produce is owned by my employer. Along with that, I imagine that the employee is getting confidential information and intellectual property from both companies...
I think when (not if) this person gets caught, he's going to be looking at massive legal bills and a forensic investigation into all his systems, record keeping and accounts to understand what w
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My first thought was good on the employee, but then looking back at the contracts I've had over the years, I've had employers that say that *everything* I produce is owned by my employer. Along with that, I imagine that the employee is getting confidential information and intellectual property from both companies...
I think when (not if) this person gets caught, he's going to be looking at massive legal bills and a forensic investigation into all his systems, record keeping and accounts to understand what was accessible by which company.
And decades of not being able to get further work in a very lucrative industry.
Stupid idea in tech industry (Score:1)
There's no way this doesn't violate some sort of employment agreement, especially at a tech company. I know someone firsthand who did this and is right now in the middle of a lengthy, expensive lawsuit where he is being sued for all of his wages over the period in question, plus $750,000 USD in investigative and legal fees.
Straight to Jail (Score:2)
and in CA the employe can't be foreced to pay (Score:2)
and in CA the employee can't be foreced to pay the legal bill under the CA laws
Employees are able to receive compensation for their attorney’s fees if they have to go to court to stand up for themselves in a non-compete dispute. Employers cannot seek attorney’s fees from the employee, even if the employer wins.
This would be considered a conflict of interest... (Score:2)
And then you ordinarily wouldn't even get to collect EI.
Employer-think (Score:3)
Does that mean he becomes the next... (Score:3)
Just like a Police Officer (Score:2)
The only scandal here is... (Score:2)
... that someone actually, voluntarily works 55 hours in two jobs where one job would have fed them more than well enough. Don't they have a life? Moreover, it's a humiliation of everyone who has to do two jobs to get along...
Many countries limit the work week for employed work to something well below those 55 hours, and that's not to protect employers, it's to protect employees. It's quite an achievment for someone to anger employers and unions and likely also a few coworkers in one and the same act. Not t
Re: (Score:2)
... that someone actually, voluntarily works 55 hours in two jobs where one job would have fed them more than well enough. Don't they have a life? Moreover, it's a humiliation of everyone who has to do two jobs to get along...
Many countries limit the work week for employed work to something well below those 55 hours, and that's not to protect employers, it's to protect employees. It's quite an achievment for someone to anger employers and unions and likely also a few coworkers in one and the same act. Not to speak of their own health.
This employee is likely in the US where very few jobs have legal limits on how many hours an adult is allowed to sell to an employer. Since this person has held both jobs since March it's unlikely that they have angered either employer at this point.
It's likely that this person currently has no life. Many places still have strict lockdowns right now, we don't know where this person lives. They at least have work to stay busy.
We have no idea what their long-term goals are. Maybe they're buying thousands of dollars in booze every week. Maybe all of the extra money is being saved and invested so they can retire earlier. Maybe they were up to their eyeballs in debt and are getting it all paid off. Maybe they're donating a ton of money to organizations they care about. It's not really anyone's business what someone else does with their own money.
I mostly agree. I didn't want to insinuate that either employers or unions or coworkers would be necessarily right in being angered.
While of course neither of both employers got the expected hours of work from the person, so, formally, they would be entitled to.
Still, it's not quite as simple, and for some points there are other possibilities, too. It could be that the person 'currently has no life' now only because of their decision to work two jobs. And it's a sad state if someone needs to "have work to s
I've been tempted (Score:2)
Trust me, I've been tempted to do this same thing. I could hold two full-time jobs if not for the meeting collisions that would eventually (and inevitably) occur.
Seriously, I've been so tempted. The work wouldn't be the problem, just the logistics.
Non-compete? (Score:2)
I'm betting he won't be working for both of them soon. It might take some work, but I imagine someone can identify who this person is, if one of the companies were to look into it after seeing this article. Its pretty dumb for anyone to talk about it so publicly. Friend of a friend is a close enough friendship, I suppose.
Re: Non-compete? (Score:2)
Isn't close enough of a friendship, I meant.
Type of job (Score:2)