JDE World To JDE OneWorld

[Guest.Visitor]

JDE World To JDE OneWorld

Diana, Interesting point. I too have a document that states I will have to re-pay the sign on/relocation bonus if I leave on MY own, within two years. To me, it is binding as I knew it in advance and signed (willingly) the document. To me it is irrevocable as the Army taught me that my word IS binding. Of course stuff happens and I may choose to excercise my right, but I would be obligated to make the reimbursement. I'm sure some lawyer types cringe when I say I take my given word as seriously as any legally binding document. IMO, there don't have to be 'whereases' and 'therefores' to know that you'll get 'what-for' if you regeg on your word. "Personality is how you act with others. Character is how you act when you are alone." -bret

[R.Daugherty]

JDE World To JDE OneWorld

"...before 3 years" geesh, Diana, I've heard 1 year a lot, but 3 years? it's no wonder you accepted another position... Ralph

[R.Daugherty]

JDE World To JDE OneWorld

"...but I would be obligated to make the reimbursement." Even so, Bret, I think nothing more than a pro-rated reimbursement is appropriate. Did yours specify the entire amount at any time, or even the amount involved? Ralph

[Guest.Visitor]

JDE World To JDE OneWorld

Ralph, It did specify an amount. The full amount! I did quite a bit of investigation on this company and would not quit unless there were a truly compelling reason. And to be honest, I did not think about a pro-rated amount because of my investigation. Perhaps I'll have to keep that in mind. -bret

[Guest.Visitor]

JDE World To JDE OneWorld

I'm sure some lawyer types cringe when I say I take my given word as seriously as any legally binding document. IMO, there don't have to be 'whereases' and 'therefores' to know that you'll get 'what-for' if you regeg on your word. You're talking like an independent contractor, Bret.  But an employer-employee relationship is characterized under law as a master-servant relationship.  Master gives an assignment, while the servant performs the duties.  Master provides the means and specifies the manner in which the work is to be accomplished, while the servant complies.  If the servant learns something in the performance of his duties, is he to be held liable for that?  No, because there's a slight difference between a servant and a slave.

Does this sound ridiculous?   It does to me.  But that's the nature of the law.  And, to some extent, I understand why.  When it comes to employer-employee relationships, who has the power?  In most cases, the employer.  They own all the intellectual property (copyrights, patents, trade secrets).  The employee may create it, but the employer owns it.  Who owns the database of all customers?  Who receives payment from customers?  If you build a relationship with a bunch of the companies customers during the course of your employment, then attempt to earn a living by selling a similar product or service to your friends (employer's customers), who cries foul?  If you are laid off, what kind of an impact does it have on their bottom line as a percentage of their total income?  But, what about your personal income?  In most cases, there's no comparison.  When you talk about employer-employee relationships, it's almost always that the employer who holds the upper hand.  So they may have you commit to this, and they have you commit to that.  But in a court of law, a Judge and Jury may say the employer took advantage.  I think the court would say that if they require you to perform a duty that needs more skill than you currently possess, they should either train you or find somebody else to do it.  Otherwise, you're an independent contractor.

Nathan.

[David Abramowitz]

JDE World To JDE OneWorld

Nathan, I'm the guy who talks like an independent contractor, and I might suggest that you temper your words. Perhaps prefacing them with the IANAL acronym. What I can tell you is that for the past fifteen years, I have been hanging with lawyers, and lobbyists, trying to repeal section 1706 of the tax reform act of 1986, and more recently attempting to role back H1-B visas. Section 1706 is a piece of abominable legislation that may catagorizes individuals as employees, even when they are corporations. As such, I have learned a thing or three about what constitutes an employee. Even then, I would not make statements of a legal nature without the preface. The potential for personal problems is only partly the reason. Dave

[Guest.Visitor]

JDE World To JDE OneWorld

Nathan wrote: "You're talking like an independent contractor, Bret." I never worked as an independent, but I did work for a consulting firm for many years on the JDE side. I guess I am just different, but I still believe that if someone says it, they should do what they can to make it happen. Putting things on paper just seems to be a way to design loopholes into the agreement. I still believe in the Iron Clad contract. Lord knows, my finance company does!!!! -bret

[Guest.Visitor]

JDE World To JDE OneWorld

Ok, Dave.  I am not a lawyer.  And I made a couple of blanket statements in my previous post for which I apologize.  But, I'm not sure, of what I said, that was the most offensive?  That the employer-employee relationship is characterized under law as a master-servant relationship?

I haven't read section 1706 of the Tax Reform Act of 1986.  But I understand that it provides guidelines to help determine whether an employer-employee relationship exists for tax withholding purposes.

It has been my experience that the IRS wants everyone to be an employee.  So if they had a hand in the legislation, then I'd probably agree that it's "abominable".  In my opinion, the IRS is a major obstacle to self employment in the computer services industry.  I have read their more "English like" guidelines of what constitutes an employee, and I'd say that it makes it very difficult for an independent contractor to earn a living.  Businesses feel uneasy about contracting with an independent for fear that the IRS will someday come after them.  And that, in my opinion, is indeed abominable.

A few years ago a former customer of mine maliciously prosecuted me in an effort to extort certain copyrights from me.  I realize that's a bold statement.  But it is absolutely fact.  The basis of their claims was that an employer-employee relationship existed.  Actually, they knew that it was false, and I knew that it was false, but the owner of the company also believed he could bury me in legal fees, and destroy my business, through litigation, which he could easily afford.  The case was finally settled in my favor.  Even the IRS agreed that I was an independent contractor.

One interesting thing, though pathetic.  The officers of the corporation with whom I worked, and also considered to be friends, were put in the difficult position of either supporting their boss in his case against me, or losing their jobs.  To claim that I was an employee went against both their moral judgment, as well as their understanding of the law.  But they also felt, that as employees, they had a duty to act in the interest of their boss.  What a dilemma!

Nathan.

[David Abramowitz]

JDE World To JDE OneWorld

Nathan Andelin wrote: But, I'm not sure, of what I said, that was the most offensive? There was no offense. Just trying to keep things in context. Dave

[R.Daugherty]

JDE World To JDE OneWorld

"But I understand that it provides guidelines to help determine whether an employer-employee relationship exists for tax withholding purposes." I have a vague recollection that the criteria was revamped by the IRS awhile back because of the heavily negative reaction they have received. Must have not been enough though... Ralph

[Guest.Visitor]

JDE World To JDE OneWorld

If there isn't an out, it's illegal. Things like that are called indentured servitude or slavery, even if you get paid a ton for them. The actual clause would say something about how the training expenses are provided as a loan to the employee, with the balance being waived after such and such a period. Other approach would be to require employee to kick in the tuition up front and then hold it in eskrow until they've completed a certain time commitment.

[Guest.Visitor]

JDE World To JDE OneWorld

My company is contemplating a move from JDE World to OneWorld, running in a co-existence mode for probably a couple years before, presuambly, switching entirely to a client server environment. I am looking for thoughts on how an RPG programmer can retool himself to thrive in this type of environment. The JDE people have come in and suggest that I learn ILE/C and C++, along with taking a bunch of OneWorld specific classes that are only taught by JDE. I'm not worried about the JDE stuff (the JDE classes could be fun, maybe they will be taught on Maui). What concerns me is the C and C++. If anybody out there has been through this environment change how did you go about learning C and C++? I have looked at the schedule of classes at 2 community colleges close by and the C classes last about 2 and 1/2 months and are at least 2 to 3 hours long if you take them 2 days a week. Taking time off during the business day to take classes probably would not fly around here so I consider the community college option totally unfair to my wife and children. Any thoughts?