Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Why do you need a contract to work? (Score 2) 73

Although this is true for at-will states, if you get fired you can still sue for wrongful termination. It will still be up to the company to prove that you were NOT fired for actionable events (such as being female, or gay, or asian, etc). Most smart companies (HR specifically) will fire you with NO REASON thus if you sue, they just have to prove you were not fired because you were female or black or whatever. If they fire you for A REASON then when you sue they ALSO have to prove that reason. So if you're fired because you show up late, and they state that in documentation, when you sue, they have to PROVE you were late and notified of being late, etc. with documentation of the infractions. In a lot of companies, if you are fired, there is NO REASON given. You might be told you're fired because you're late, but the documentation does not list a reason, thus helping the company in the event of a lawsuit.

Comment Re:Trump! (Score 1) 533

Wait, those jobs were all scheduled for Mexico. Trump negotiated about half to stay in the US. What's the problem here? 1,000 jobs times about $40,000 each employees salary is $40 million dollars that the company is spending on payroll that will be added to the economy (because those with jobs will spend that money). It "cost" the government of Indiana $7 million to keep $40 million of salary in their state. What's the problem with that? Would it be better to send all the jobs to Mexico and the state gets $0? In fact the state would get negative dollars since those people would lose their jobs and end up on welfare/unemployment/underemployment. I think its a win-win. Trump gets his credit, those 1,000 people keep their job, and the economy does have to absorb 2600 lost jobs and wages. If you ask those 1,000 people who keep their job, I bet that all say its a win. Not one of them would say "fuck it i'd rather Clinton in the WH and no job". Have to give credit where credit is due. You don't have to like Trump but you have to see this as a win. Its not a perfect arrangement, but the other option is what? ALL the jobs moved to Mexico. That's not a win.

Comment Re:Toys (Score 2) 192

Registering handguns with unique serial numbers has turned out quite well for law enforcement hasn't it? The reality is that this is dumb and there's no need for it. If a drone flies over your house you should be allowed to shoot it down, period.

Comment Re:If one employee had done this (Score 1) 341

This is not the answer. If Jeb and Colin were not caught or held to the same standards that doesn't excuse the current person from those same standards. Just because you drove a leaded-gas car in 1960 doesn't mean you need to pay for lead poisoning now that they got rid of lead from gasoline. They changed the rules, and the people who violated the new rules aren't accountable anymore. The people who are accountable are those who are supposed to follow the new rules. Thats how it works. If Colin violated the rules 15 years ago well then he should be punished. But he didn't, and those rules weren't even in place when he was SOS.

Comment Re:rotten at the top (Score 2) 341

I have to agree to a certain extent. At what point did any of these 5000+ people say "hey this is wrong?" Apparently none of them. That's pretty sad. Yes, quitting on ethical grounds sucks, being out of a job you had because you quit sucks, but I'm sure a lawyer would have loved to take that case against WF. But its not an easy decision to make. Pay the rent, or quit because of 'ethics'. I can see how some people would have a problem with the latter in order to keep doing to former.

Comment Nice scheme you have there.. (Score 1) 445

Wait, the 'tax' is on ride-sharing services that 'cannot pass the tax on to the riders'.. How is that going to be enforced? How will anyone be able to tell a $0.20 increase in their fee without detailed analysis? Are you going to do that analysis while riding in a taxi for 10 minutes? Anyone else notice that only 25% of the fee is going to support the local Taxi service... Where's the other 75% going? Does no one do any research on these fees and see that they are simply a money-grabbing scam for the government? Isn't Charlie Baker a republican? Aren't they again taxation for small businesses and 'the little people'? Since when does business A have to pay a tax to support business B? How is that the 'free market' republicans claim they support? Wouldn't it have made more sense to reduce or eliminate the government-forced payment system that the taxis use now, in order to better compete in the emerging ride-sharing service? The governments solution to competition is to tax the better-setup system? CRAZY! Oh wait, its Massachusetts... No wonder I left 15 years ago.. Sorry guys, Baker (R) is really Baker (RINO).

Comment Re:WE need unions also why train your h1-b replamn (Score 1) 472

Not to refuse what you posted, but I have seen both good and bad unions. I think the 'ideal' union is like the 'ideal' government, and both are the same as the 'ideal' gas law: that is, it works on paper but that's not how the real world works.

Slashdot Top Deals

You are in a maze of little twisting passages, all different.

Working...