Sythe, a response if you're interested

[Grave]

My workers appreciate the current system since it allows them more flexibility on how much their effort and carefulness impacts their pay. In fact, it allows them to get paid much more than they would otherwise, and they generally understand their responsibilities. To give you an idea, they get paid per delivery now, plus an averaged value percentage of our revenue based on our points system. However, since it is to the best interest of Sythe, I will go ahead and try to shift over to a system where workers will not be held accountable, or very reduced account, over their negligence. As for explicitly stating what is expected of the users, this was done ever since the contract was drafted. It was only the draft we went by that made it seem terrible, which I admit, it was.

In addition, I will attempt to get Mayberry to request phone records from his carrier to prove that Corey never made the call, to clear my name.


Cheers

 

[Wolfdog]

Ok.

... Hey babe, I owe you money.

 

Go to a lawyer Grave. Get him to draft you a good contract. Return with avengeance!

 

[NickV]

I see you Richard.

Grave, I'm a pre-law major and I have a couple lawyer friends who would be willing to make you a contract!

 

[Grave]

I see you Richard.

Grave, I'm a pre-law major and I have a couple lawyer friends who would be willing to make you a contract!

The latest version should be pretty good, as it was written by a lawyer. However, Sythe did point out the apparent flaws with the bonus/penalty system we have. I'm not sure if he read everything in detail. I'll speak to her again about it and see if there's any issues. What I am concerned about though, is if the agreement will uphold in future disputes on Sythe, which is why I would be changing it.

 

My workers appreciate the current system since it allows them more flexibility on how much their effort and carefulness impacts their pay. In fact, it allows them to get paid much more than they would otherwise, and they generally understand their responsibilities. To give you an idea, they get paid per delivery now, plus an averaged value percentage of our revenue based on our points system. However, since it is to the best interest of Sythe, I will go ahead and try to shift over to a system where workers will not be held accountable, or very reduced account, over their negligence. As for explicitly stating what is expected of the users, this was done ever since the contract was drafted. It was only the draft we went by that made it seem terrible, which I admit, it was.

In addition, I will attempt to get Mayberry to request phone records from his carrier to prove that Corey never made the call, to clear my name.


Cheers

I think you still do not understand the difficulties you face in your business structure.

Either your workers are agents of your business, in which case you are taking the vast majority of chargeback risk, or your workers are not your agents (and therefore not your employees) but are separate different businesses conducting their own affairs in their own name (or under your business name via franchise), in which case they are taking the majority of the chargeback risk.

If you think you can have it some third way via a complicated contract then I sincerely suggest that you at the very least take your contract to a solicitor and have it looked over. You will want originals signed and witnessed and posted to you as well.

You must recognise that if an employee operates within the bounds of his contract then all of his actions are the actions of your business. He has no responsibility or liability for any loss incurred to your business during the ordinary course of following the directives in his contract with you. You may be shocked to learn that even if the contract explicitly states that the employees will be responsible for business loses during the ordinary course of their employment, this will not stand up at equity law.

My advice for your restructuring would be to treat each worker as an independent business. Have them set up their own google checkout accounts in their own names. Then they can be responsible for their own chargeback risk. You sell them gold at a low price, they retail it at a high price and take the risk you are unwilling to.

 

[NickV]

My advice for your restructuring would be to treat each worker as an independent business. Have them set up their own google checkout accounts in their own names. Then they can be responsible for their own chargeback risk. You sell them gold at a low price, they retail it at a high price and take the risk you are unwilling to.

+1, or not even a "low price" just the same price to make the same commission they do now. Would work great.
Hi Sythe.


Someone, Nick rank pls?

 

[Jimmy]

Someone, Nick rank pls?

It's not happening.

 

[NickV]

It's not happening.

I offer you gifts of Sams facebook?!

Nick rank pls

 

[Grave]

You must recognise that if an employee operates within the bounds of his contract then all of his actions are the actions of your business. He has no responsibility or liability for any loss incurred to your business during the ordinary course of following the directives in his contract with you. You may be shocked to learn that even if the contract explicitly states that the employees will be responsible for business loses during the ordinary course of their employment, this will not stand up at equity law.

In that case, I am not worried. I have respect for them and don't find them responsible for anything, as long as they respect the codes of conduct.

My advice for your restructuring would be to treat each worker as an independent business. Have them set up their own google checkout accounts in their own names. Then they can be responsible for their own chargeback risk. You sell them gold at a low price, they retail it at a high price and take the risk you are unwilling to.

I have thought about that, and it's a direction we will go if we expand. They already are classified as independent contractors under the contract, meaning that they are providing a service of carrying out our orders, and if they do this service incorrectly, they assume responsibilities for the damages. And again, no, I do not expect them to cover the risks of my business: only the damages they generate as a direct cause of not follow directions.

What concerns me the most is your statement about our penalty/bonus system. They receive a commission per delivery, and then rack up points for dedicating time, and doing thing correctly, while losing points for misactions. It's a great way for me to keep my workers and excuse them for their mistakes. And I don't think it's very illegal: any other business would dock pays based on negligence. In addition, these points allow them to earn an additional amount of money in relation to our monthly profits. From this bonus, and from a percentage of what they earn as commission, to be more specific, 5%, is set aside to help cover chargebacks. I also chip in, and this will cover any negligence aswell. They are only responsible for the $10.30 chargeback fee in this case, and if the chargeback funds run out, they will only be expected to cover our loss if they did not follow procedures.

 

[Heads447]

I hate Grave and RSU.

What'd you say to Grave little bitch?














































kidding

 

[NickV]

What'd you say to Grave little bitch?














































kidding

Inb4accoutgone

 

What concerns me the most is your statement about our penalty/bonus system. They receive a commission per delivery, and then rack up points for dedicating time, and doing thing correctly, while losing points for misactions. It's a great way for me to keep my workers and excuse them for their mistakes. And I don't think it's very illegal: any other business would dock pays based on negligence. In addition, these points allow them to earn an additional amount of money in relation to our monthly profits. From this bonus, and from a percentage of what they earn as commission, to be more specific, 5%, is set aside to help cover chargebacks. I also chip in, and this will cover any negligence aswell. They are only responsible for the $10.30 chargeback fee in this case, and if the chargeback funds run out, they will only be expected to cover our loss if they did not follow procedures.

There's a difference between a penalty clause in a contract (like for example: if you break a plate in my restaurant you owe me $10000) and a set of conditions on which the pay or commission is based. You are usually free to set the conditions under which the contractor/employee earns a commission to whatever you like. (You can make this a points system if you see fit.)

Penalties are different. If for example you claimed a worker owed you $250 because he was rude to a customer, this generally would not be upheld. The amount owed you (if anything) is generally limited to actual damages. This is often irrespective of what the contract states (depending your jurisdiction.)

It's a complicated topic. You should look up equity law and penalty clauses. Remember: equity law sits above common law (and therefore above contract law) and has a lot to say about the fairness (or unfairness) of your contracts. It can (and routinely does) override clauses in contracts in order to make the parties 'whole'.

Considering that you run a very high risk business it will likely be worth your while to do some more research before restructuring including, I would strongly suggest, seeing a solicitor.

 

[Grave]

There's a difference between a penalty clause in a contract (like for example: if you break a plate in my restaurant you owe me $10000) and a set of conditions on which the pay or commission is based. You are usually free to set the conditions under which the contractor/employee earns a commission to whatever you like. (You can make this a points system if you see fit.)

Penalties are different. If for example you claimed a worker owed you $250 because he was rude to a customer, this generally would not be upheld. The amount owed you (if anything) is generally limited to actual damages. This is often irrespective of what the contract states (depending your jurisdiction.)

Again, that's from the older, unorganized version of the agreement. I do agree with you on this. The agreement we used in the Corey case was my attempt at mashing up everything we had discussed on Skype earlier while the more organized contract was made ready. In the new version a worker would lose bonus points based on misactions, which all have defined values in the Codes of Conduct.

It's a complicated topic. You should look up equity law and penalty clauses. Remember: equity law sits above common law (and therefore above contract law) and has a lot to say about the fairness (or unfairness) of your contracts. It can (and routinely does) override clauses in contracts in order to make the parties 'whole'.

Considering that you run a very high risk business it will likely be worth your while to do some more research before restructuring including, I would strongly suggest, seeing a solicitor.

Since we're highly integrated into Sythe, the rulings here matter more than it would in the real world. While I could technically take legal actions against my workers and vise versa, the legal costs offset the benefits. I am definitely looking into the legality of the contract as it stands though. Thanks for bringing up the possible issues with it. As for your final statement, it's not as high risk as you think, as long as my workers stay within the limits. For example, in the past the limit was 999M per order, and generally one order per 2 days, although it was undefined. Now we have a better structure and we're more careful, thus out of approximately 2000 orders, we have had 20 chargebacks.

 

[Brendan]

Denied.

i'm no sythe, but hi you

 

Since we're highly integrated into Sythe, the rulings here matter more than it would in the real world. While I could technically take legal actions against my workers and vise versa, the legal costs offset the benefits. I am definitely looking into the legality of the contract as it stands though. Thanks for bringing up the possible issues with it.

While sythe.org is not a private court, we are frequently asked to adjudicate disputes between members. Whether the parties are aware or not, for the most part, these disputes are settled on common law and equitable principles by our staff.

I would hesitate therefore to say this is not the real world; The sums of money are real. People often are required to pay back considerable sums before returning. While it is true that we only have the power to ban people, if two parties agree to arbitration here then that may preclude them from seeking arbitration elsewhere. That is: one party may be able to prove the matter has already been settled out of court. Evidence of existing settlement can be a strong defence.

So making sure your contracts are legal and are sensible is definitely a good idea.

 

While sythe.org is not a private court, we are frequently asked to adjudicate disputes between members. Whether the parties are aware or not, for the most part, these disputes are settled on common law and equitable principles by our staff.

I would hesitate therefore to say this is not the real world; The sums of money are real. People often are required to pay back considerable sums before returning. While it is true that we only have the power to ban people, if two parties agree to arbitration here then that may preclude them from seeking arbitration elsewhere. That is: one party may be able to prove the matter has already been settled out of court. Evidence of existing settlement can be a strong defence.

So making sure your contracts are legal and are sensible is definitely a good idea.

= gg lawl

 

While sythe.org is not a private court, we are frequently asked to adjudicate disputes between members. Whether the parties are aware or not, for the most part, these disputes are settled on common law and equitable principles by our staff.

I would hesitate therefore to say this is not the real world; The sums of money are real. People often are required to pay back considerable sums before returning. While it is true that we only have the power to ban people, if two parties agree to arbitration here then that may preclude them from seeking arbitration elsewhere. That is: one party may be able to prove the matter has already been settled out of court. Evidence of existing settlement can be a strong defence.

So making sure your contracts are legal and are sensible is definitely a good idea.

Sythe = A Lawyer
GG

 

[Emperor Nero]

While sythe.org is not a private court, we are frequently asked to adjudicate disputes between members. Whether the parties are aware or not, for the most part, these disputes are settled on common law and equitable principles by our staff.

I would hesitate therefore to say this is not the real world; The sums of money are real. People often are required to pay back considerable sums before returning. While it is true that we only have the power to ban people, if two parties agree to arbitration here then that may preclude them from seeking arbitration elsewhere. That is: one party may be able to prove the matter has already been settled out of court. Evidence of existing settlement can be a strong defence.

So making sure your contracts are legal and are sensible is definitely a good idea.

+1 for binding arbitration!