"Right To Work"?

[Imagebuffet]

One of the temp workers in my office showed me a clause in his contract. The clause says that if he quits within 90 days, he agrees to pay the temp agency TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS, for the lost wages and damage he would cause to the relationship between the agency and the client. How is something like that even legal in Texas? Keep in mind that he isn't getting very much money working here.

Every day seems to add another reason to hate corporate business!

[J Eddington]

that is very standard with employees that are hired through an agency.

[KJ Smith]

He signed the contract.

Most large companies have non-compete clauses. If you go to work foe a competitor Wotan a year, you can be sued.

I think you have a misunderstanding of what right to work means.

I will let someone with more knowledge fill in the details. Its basically a open shop thing. Meaning a non-union guy can work and do the same job as a union guy, without being in the union. The union must treat him just like any other union employee.

Kevin

[Kev]

here's a good description of the Texas (and most other state) right to work law:
Right-to-work laws are state statutes that ban the practice of requiring union membership or financial support to a union as a condition of employment, and provide employees with individual bargaining rights.
These laws establish the legal right of employees to decide for themselves whether or not to join or financially support a union.

http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/s...0/focus10.html

Some may be confusing "non-compete" with the information in the law concerning "fee for privilege to work"

[CaptainTom]

I've never been one to like the fact that the worker is at the mercy of the employer. I've always been a Union guy for that reason.
The "right to work" isn't a God given right though, and when someone signs a contract that has clauses in it that are what I would consider draconian I can only say that that employee should have known better.

When we band together and all refuse to sign a contract like that, the agency would be forced to modify their policy.

[KJ Smith]

Every employee is at the mercy of the employer. Union or not.

The big difference is how long it takes them to get it done.

Its the golden rule, He who hes the gold..... rules.

Kevin

[CaptainTom]

Originally Posted by KJ Smith

Every employee is at the mercy of the employer. Union or not.

The big difference is how long it takes them to get it done.

Its the golden rule, He who hes the gold..... rules.

Kevin

Generally speaking yes, but if the labor force unites under one roof it can then pressure the employer to change policies.
Also, a labor union can negotiate a contract for its members. The employer must then work within the negotiated contract.

Contract: If an employee and an employer signed an employment contract, each party to the contract has the duty and obligation to adhere to the terms and conditions of that contract. Wrongful termination can occur if the employer terminates the employee in violation of the contract - oral or written. It is also important to note that an employee can also be sued for violation of an employment contract if he/she is in breach.

[jtillery]

From what I have seen, that clause protects the company who is furnishing the temp. This keeps the company using the agency from hiring the temp outright and cutting the agency out of thier percentage they recieve for the term of the contract.

[lancemoreland]

I worked for a Texas Company that hired a marketing rep who had signed a non-compete agreement with her previous employer. Her previous employer sued us and the marketing rep. We were in court about 3 minutes. The judge threw the case out before it started and lectured that you could not prevent someone from making a living in Texas. I guess if the other company would have agreed to pay the employee during the non compete period, it could have gone the other way.

[RKEnnis]

I think the phrase "employment at will" is more applicable than "right to work" in this specific situation. Texas is an employment at will state, meaning that either of the parties in a employer/employee relationship can terminate that relationship at any time. (Unless of course they have entered into an employment contract!)

I found this on the Texas Workforce Commision website:

"the basic rule of Texas employment law is employment at will, which applies to all phases of the employment relationship - it means that absent a statute or an express agreement (such as an employment contract) to the contrary, either party in an employment relationship may modify any of the terms or conditions of employment, or terminate the relationship altogether, for any reason, or no particular reason at all, with or without advance notice"

http://www.twc.state.tx.us/news/efte...s_general.html

[CaptainTom]

Originally Posted by jtillery

From what I have seen, that clause protects the company who is furnishing the temp. This keeps the company using the agency from hiring the temp outright and cutting the agency out of thier percentage they recieve for the term of the contract.

That makes sense. I just wish it weren't so detrimental to the poor temp. who is caught in the middle. Companies will always have more power than the worker. Golden rule and all.

[jtillery]

I am not so sure it is detrimental to the the temp. The person has signed a contract. Say the temp agency charges $20 an hour, pays the temp $13 an hour, the company using the temp offers the him/her $15 and hour plus benefits. Who wouldnt jump ship and go for the long term weekly paycheck with more money. A lot of temp agencies would go out of business if this was allowed. But I do see your point about companies whether there has been a union present or not.

[KJ Smith]

Well, that was pretty good, we managed to discuss this without letting it get political.

We can all get along................sometimes.

Kevin

[CaptainTom]

The original poster said that if the employee quit, he was contractually obligated to pay the temp agency a $10,000 'fine'. That would take a while to make the $2/hr pay increase a benefit.

[Imagebuffet]

Originally Posted by J Eddington

that is very standard with employees that are hired through an agency.

Almost everyone in my office (hundreds of people a day, turn-over rate of 6 months) was brought in as a temp. I've never seen a clause like this, before. The co-worker who showed me this clause in his contract also showed the other temps near him. One said he wouldn't have signed a contract like that. Apparently, it is just this one temp agency that has this clause. Mine didn't.