What about Bob?

[MCK]

Hilarious...

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2414357,00.asp

Amazing how long he got away with it and got great performance reviews etc. I truly think laziness is at the heart of most inventions and progress... As silly as it sounds...

[xtian]

Hey, Lefty! Got an idea for you!

[briane]

Now I know my new business!

I'm a software guy - great idea! A way for every one of us to get rich - just get 3 jobs! The work got done, they might not even have legal recourse against him if there were no security issues to consider! Sounds like unlawful dismissal to me.

Really though - I once worked with a guy who had 2 jobs - it was a scam - always sick or on vacation till we finally caught him.

-b

[Structo]

Wow!
Amazing story.

If he had put forth half the effort he used to outsource his job he would probably be even richer.

[LeftyStrat]

Wow. Bob is my hero.

[Bob S]

Thanks Lefty.

Sorry - too good to miss.

[M Fowler]

Office Space

[Phil_S]

This was a such a good read, I posted it on my local accounting technology forum. It's a fascinating story and indeed very clever. Too bad it sounds to me like it's fraud and he could end up having to pay back unearned wages, and maybe face some jail time, too. I have a feeling the company simply let him off easy with a firing.

[vibratoking]

I actually don't think there is any fraud involved. I don't think there is anything illegal about what Bob did. I did not read about any damages suffered by the employer. It may not be fully ethical, but i can't think of any laws that were actually broken as a result of outsourcing his job.

[Colossal]

Office Space

Joanna: So you're gonna quit?
Peter Gibbons: Nuh-uh. Not really. Uh...I'm just gonna stop going.

[briane]

Wow. Bob is my hero.

mine too.

As I said before - theres no law that was broken aside from security - and there isnt one there unless he signed something to that effect.

I've signed a lot of tech agreements - and read them all with a lawyers eye - NOT a SINGLE one has ever specified that I (my name - to be legal) agrees to be the sole provider of any code or contributions I make to the project. Thus I can get my 'awesome' code from anyplace I desire.

Violation of non-disclosure, probably - but not enforcable since that would have resulted in bob's unemployment. Most states declare null and void any non-disclosure that can lead to a person being dependent on state funding, such as through unemployment.

Bob came up with some code - good code - and then was fired. I'm pretty sure he can sue the company for wrongfull dismissmal.

Not only is it legal - the company committed a crime when it fired him without 3 written warnings to decist that activity - as per the law on firings.

SUE EM BOB!!!!!!!YOU HAVE A CASE!

[NickC]

Anybody can sue anybody, for any reason, or for no reason. Winning the case is another matter entirely. It all comes down to who has the most money for lawyers, and the stomach for a long, painful, protracted court case.

Most state DOLs recognize that employers can terminate employment on-the-spot for gross insubordination. No warnings needed. No "three strikes and you're out". I'd say that applies in this case, whether there was a formal NDA or not.

My day-job is managing a large internal audit department, and doing the occasional forensic audit.

[MCK]

Unless he worked for DoD or a related defense contractor etc I don't think he will get in hot water beyond getting fired. Whether he fights back is hopefully to be seen.

Perhaps the company fired him so they can retain 'his' outsourcer in his place and bring their cost to 1/5th... He simply showed them the way.

[Phil_S]

Not only is it legal - the company committed a crime when it fired him without 3 written warnings to decist that activity - as per the law on firings.

There is no such rule. Employment is largely at-will. Read here: http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/lab ... rview.aspx

[briane]

There is no such rule. Employment is largely at-wil

true, but you forget.....

then he needs to be laid off - he cannot be fired - there is a difference.

I'm not saying he should sue - just that I think he would win if he had the resources.