The questions-not-worth-their-own-thread question thread VIII

[SS-18 ICBM]

Yes, but his objective was just burning calories.

 

[Mirc]

Question: let's say you get to have a first look at a contract for a prospective job. Then you see that one of the stipulations there is that if you want to quit, you have to announce that at least 7 weeks in advance, and you can only do so at (four) certain times in a year. Afterwards, it is specifically stated that the company can fire you whenever they want.

Would you find this fair?

I'm not talking about "their company, their right to do whatever they want". I'm not complaining about that at all, or disputing their authority, etc etc - I'm just wondering what you guys would think of this particular contract.

@Mirc

That must have been terrifying.
I'm not a bad flyer either but its pretty rational to be scared in that situation.

I'm glad I'm not going insane... and that I'm not the only one to think that.

 

[say1988]

Would you find this fair?

It would depend on the job and the rest of the contract.

But by "fire you whenever they want" do you mean they don't need to have cause, just because the feel like it? If that is the case, there may be a problem, but with enough compensation, it can be acceptable.

 

[Mirc]

It would depend on the job and the rest of the contract.

But by "fire you whenever they want" do you mean they don't need to have cause, just because the feel like it? If that is the case, there may be a problem, but with enough compensation, it can be acceptable.

It's a job as a teacher in a private music school. The conditions are generally very good (pay and flexibility, which are my main 2 points), but there are some shady clauses that I'm not so sure about... (like certain things that I am not allowed to do during or after having worked there, with no mention of any "expiry date" at all, meaning they are valid... eternally?? ) Granted, I'm slightly paranoid about those things.

I think that they don't need to state a cause... And that's exactly my problem with it. But my German is not good enough yet to understand the fine nuances of such contracts. I will ask my flatmates for a translation in English, or at least an explanation as to what they would understand from that.

There isn't any mention of any compensation whatsoever.

 

[Flying Pig]

Question: let's say you get to have a first look at a contract for a prospective job. Then you see that one of the stipulations there is that if you want to quit, you have to announce that at least 7 weeks in advance, and you can only do so at (four) certain times in a year. Afterwards, it is specifically stated that the company can fire you whenever they want.

I've worked under far stricter rules than that for most of my life (although for the last five years that they applied, I handed in my years' notice every year but always revoked it). It shows that they think you will have so much responsibility that to leave your post unfilled would be a crisis. Consider it an honour

 

[really]

Sounds reasonable for a teaching job - they don't want you leaving in the middle of term - and they want to have enough time to replace you.

 

[say1988]

It's a job as a teacher in a private music school.

Then the first part you mentioned seems perfectly reasonable, but I don't know what is typical in Germany.

If I were you I would try and contact some people in similar positions and see what their contracts are like in regards to what you are worried about. You may not like a clause, but if it is standard in all contracts you likely won't have much say in the matter.

like certain things that I am not allowed to do during or after having worked there, with no mention of any "expiry date" at all, meaning they are valid... eternally??

Restrictions while working for an organization are common and afterward makes sense, but without knowing German law, I can't say the legal status. At the same time, after being away for a while it is likely that they will be unenforced after a while, unless you make the news big time and bring bad publicity to your former employer.

If you are really worried and unsure, I would definitely say to check it with a lawyer.

 

[holy king]

why is water wet?

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Adhesion, hydrogen bonding, polar interactions, and various other intermolecular forces and derivative effects.

 

[Mirc]

I've worked under far stricter rules than that for most of my life (although for the last five years that they applied, I handed in my years' notice every year but always revoked it). It shows that they think you will have so much responsibility that to leave your post unfilled would be a crisis. Consider it an honour

I know that far stricter conditions are quite common, don't get me wrong, I know this is a great place to live in, and conditions everywhere around here are generally good.

Sounds reasonable for a teaching job - they don't want you leaving in the middle of term - and they want to have enough time to replace you.

It can hardly be called a term since there are no grades, no exams, no obligations etc etc. Anyone can even come at any point and leave at any point... during or outside the duration of the term. And why do they not apply the same standard for me? I also don't want to be left with no money in the middle of my university semester either, and a majority of their teachers are students, so I'm not a special case at all).

Again, I'm not complaining. I have to choose between two places to teach, and I'm simply trying to make the better decision. The other possible job doesn't have similar conditions at all, on this matter.

Then the first part you mentioned seems perfectly reasonable, but I don't know what is typical in Germany.

I also find the first part reasonable, I was just wondering if you guys thought it was reasonable that I did not also receive the same treatment as they want to receive from me, when it's a purely mutual situation.

If I were you I would try and contact some people in similar positions and see what their contracts are like in regards to what you are worried about. You may not like a clause, but if it is standard in all contracts you likely won't have much say in the matter.

I'm going to do that, definitely. And yeah, if something is standard, I am aware that there's not going to be much for me to do.

Restrictions while working for an organization are common and afterward makes sense, but without knowing German law, I can't say the legal status. At the same time, after being away for a while it is likely that they will be unenforced after a while, unless you make the news big time and bring bad publicity to your former employer.

Well, this is hopefully the case, I'm trying to find more information about this right now. (no luck yet, but still trying)

If you are really worried and unsure, I would definitely say to check it with a lawyer.

Well... If I'm really worried and unsure I won't take the job. A lawyer would be way too expensive for me right now, especially since I would have to get an English-speaking one (there's no way I'm gonna be able to discuss such matters in German), and those cost a lot more.

 

[Yared]

@mirc

Have you tried asking for clarifications as to what the clause really means?

 

[GinandTonic]

I also find the first part reasonable, I was just wondering if you guys thought it was reasonable that I did not also receive the same treatment as they want to receive from me, when it's a purely mutual situation.

In practical terms they would fire you on a term basis too, but they reserve the theoretical right to do so otherwise. Similarly if things really go off the rails for you they prob wouldnt be hardarsed about letting you walk off in the middle of term. They just want you to sign a contract that gives them every possible latitude since you want the job more than they want you.

It's just a piece of paper. Employment law prob trounces 1/2 of whats written on it.

 

[say1988]

I don't know German employment law (or anything the EU may override), but in Canada employment law depends significantly on whether he is actually an employee or just contractor. Being the latter basically leaves them free to do anything so long as it doesn't violate the contract.

 

[PlutonianEmpire]

A while ago, I saw a special on terraforming Mars. In the end, they said that after a while, Mars will eventually revert to it's current state. How, or why, will that happen? And can anything be done to keep Mars habitable for the very long-term (at least a billion years) once terraforming is complete?

 

[Cutlass]

A while ago, I saw a special on terraforming Mars. In the end, they said that after a while, Mars will eventually revert to it's current state. How, or why, will that happen? And can anything be done to keep Mars habitable for the very long-term (at least a billion years) once terraforming is complete?

Not that I'm an expert, but IIRC, Mars doesn't have a magnetic field. And also Mars is much smaller than Earth. Both those factors contribute to having the atmosphere float off into space over time. With nothing to replenish it, it would fade to minuscule and unable to support Earth life again.

 

[Genocidicbunny]

There's no known cause as to why Mars's supposed atmosphere drifted off in the first place. Until that cause is found and can be rectified, it will continue to occur. The hope is that the process is slow enough that the atmosphere can be replenished by man-made methods.

 

[gangleri2001]

Do you like my new some-maniac-scientologist looks?

 

[Karalysia]

Which of these is most effective for losing weight:

Treadmill:

Bike machine thing:

Step and handle machine thing:

Is there any value in doing all three?

 

[GinandTonic]

Coffee and cigarettes.

 

[say1988]

Which of these is most effective for losing weight

If properly used, all three are likely quite similar.

The difference comes from what muscles are being used. You may be capable of using the treadmill or bike more efficiently (going faster and/or longer). Or you can go with one you are weaker with and improve those muscles.