Hacker News Reader

> Considering you did all this voluntarily I don't think there's anything you can sue your employer for. They set the terms of your employment, you agreed to them and have been carrying them out, and they pay you.

In Canada there's the legal concept of not being able to sign away your rights. Ie. if something is illegal in the first place, agreeing to it doesn't make it legal. The UK is probably similar.

>>In Canada there's the legal concept of not being able to sign away your rights. Ie. if something is illegal in the first place, agreeing to it doesn't make it legal.

There is also that concept in some US states. However, that does NOT mean that your rights are simply immediately enforceable. It is merely a ticket to file a lawsuit. Even in a state with very strong laws in this direction, and even if you can find an attny to do it affordably, it can be a VERY long process; e.g., from direct experience, 7 years and just getting to the appeals level to get that actually enforced on an employer who is determined to stiff the employee.

You really are far better off recognizing the toxic management and cutting your losses as early as possible. They will only fail sooner then.

Similar to the US. Just because someone calls you a contractor (but not really) doesn't mean you suddenly lose all rights. Misclassification is a huge no-no for the DoL.

Sure you can sue them. The employee contractor line is a big part of labour law, and can affect UK mandated legal protections and benefits. The only problem is that a labour lawyer starts at $400/hr. One way to get around this is to band together with other contractors in your organization and pool your money to purchase a lawyer. We typically call this a union. I was high up in my union and signed some very big cheques to lawyers.

Of course that's hard so you should just get a new job.

He doesn't need to sue. If his story is correct he has a large amount of leverage in a negotiation and just needs to use it.

1. He is a high performer and is solely responsible for at least one project of consequence.

2. His productivity numbers are at the top for his colleagues.

3. There are a number of things that will fall over if he is no longer there.

Right now the company is picking and choosing how they treat him because they think they can. All he has to do is get another offer of employment and tell them about it. Either they will renegotiate the contract under more favorable terms to retain him. Or he will find employment at a better company where he is valued for what he is actually worth. The company he's at now think they don't need to take any action because they believe he isn't a flight risk. Change that perception and things will be very different.

If his story is correct he has a large amount of leverage in a negotiation..

You can't negotiate if the opposing party is unreasonable, and by the sounds of it they definitely are.

Truly unreasonable people often only look unreasonable right up until the threat of actually losing one of their most valuable employees looks credible. Then they change their tune pretty quickly.

Either way if you are negotiating with the leverage to just walk away then you have placed yourself in a win/win scenario.

In my country one can report employers that treat contractors as employees to the customs agency (idk why that one) which may investigate the company and rectify the situation.

Given that the company doesn't have an office in the country the most likely outcome will be that they will just give all the employees in the country the option to move or get fired, though...

I also don't know how and if a local agency would have any way to enforce employment laws across borders.