As one who *has* accepted a counter offer, it really does depend. In my case, I was given a "unheardof" 14% raise (actually, not much given that I should've been put into a different "position"... help desk != unix admin). I voiced that opinion and was told "you're free to seek employment elsewhere if you think you can do better". I resigned the next morning (had an offer letter from a consulting firm for 2x my new salary.
My employer countered with a really significant raise. Since the consulting firm said "the job will be here whenever you're ready" (yes, I trusted them) and since I had stuff I wanted to complete at my current job (not to mention that I was too broke to move for the consulting job). I accepted.
However, 6 months later, I took the consulting position.
That said, I accepted the counter knowing full well that I wouldn't stay permanently. (When I resigned the second time I gave them significantly more notice than the 2 weeks I had given them the first time around).
Certain points do apply:
1. If they think you're that valuable now, and weren't going to give it to you without the threat of leaving, you were being screwed. 2. Most employees who accept a counter won't be around 6-12 months later. Generally because money is almost _never_ the entire reason people leave a job. (There is usually some other reason, money is only part of it). Most employers know this fact also (that's why many will NEVER make a counteroffer).
Personally, I view the problem with Copyright (not patent) law in it's current form as being the saleability of such copyright. Based on that, maybe we should throw the whole thing out the window and start over.
Consider this (my proposal):
1. Copyrights can NOT be sold. Under any circumstances. 2. They CAN, however, be "leased" for a finite period (say, 5 years) to a publisher/content provider. Those leases can be exclusive for that period of time. After the lease has expired, the creator/copyright owner, has the option to shop it around. 3. Copyrights should expire XX years after the creator's death. At that point, the work should revert to the public domain. What number should we use? 25 or 50 years maybe? 4. A provision should exist to prevent corporate takeover of copyrighted works. The "you worked for me when you wrote that" provisions in many contracts should be null and void. However, corporations SHOULD be able to own works that they explicitly contracted someone to create on their behalf. 5. Copyrights should expire automatically after 25 years if the work remains unpublished during that time.
I believe that the 5 provisions listed above would have the following imapact: - The creators would actually profit MORE from their own works. (Instead of publishers) - This would encourage the publishers to go out and find NEW artists on a more regular basis (yes, the publishing companies would actually have to WORK harder). Because these new artists would tend to be cheaper than the established ones. - This would force the publishing companies to re-issue material more often or risk it reverting to the public domain.
As far as patent law is concerned, I tend to agree with the majority of posters. The OLD (~20 years ago) interpretation of patent law probably served us better than the current "patent anything" interpretations.
Personally, if the RIAA were really an association of ARTISTS protecting their rights instead of an association of PUBLISHERS protecting their rights to milk the artists, then I'd be more sympathetic to their cause.
"Age discrimination" is discriminating against an employee over 40 years of age for "being too old". There is no reference to "being too young". Discriminating against someone for "being too young" is perfectly legal.
I could be wrong about this, but from an anti-discrimination seminar that I attended about 8-10 years ago, I seem to remember that the legal classification of "age discrimination" only applies to people "over 40". (therefore, if you're "under 40" the "age discrimination" laws don't apply).
(This will create an ascii file "foo.txt" that contains every create statement for the objects in the database... this includes tables and indexes... I also believe that it will give you the create tablespace statements... note that only the create index statements are "usable"... you will have to un-comment the rest... oh... It may not do stored procedures... been a while since I've used it...)
Slashdot Mirror
As one who *has* accepted a counter offer, it really does depend. In my case, I was given a "unheardof" 14% raise (actually, not much given that I should've been put into a different "position"... help desk != unix admin). I voiced that opinion and was told "you're free to seek employment elsewhere if you think you can do better". I resigned the next morning (had an offer letter from a consulting firm for 2x my new salary.
My employer countered with a really significant raise. Since the consulting firm said "the job will be here whenever you're ready" (yes, I trusted them) and since I had stuff I wanted to complete at my current job (not to mention that I was too broke to move for the consulting job). I accepted.
However, 6 months later, I took the consulting position.
That said, I accepted the counter knowing full well that I wouldn't stay permanently. (When I resigned the second time I gave them significantly more notice than the 2 weeks I had given them the first time around).
Certain points do apply:
1. If they think you're that valuable now, and weren't going to give it to you without the threat of leaving, you were being screwed.
2. Most employees who accept a counter won't be around 6-12 months later. Generally because money is almost _never_ the entire reason people leave a job. (There is usually some other reason, money is only part of it). Most employers know this fact also (that's why many will NEVER make a counteroffer).
Personally, I view the problem with Copyright (not patent) law in it's current form as being the saleability of such copyright. Based on that, maybe we should throw the whole thing out the window and start over.
Consider this (my proposal):
1. Copyrights can NOT be sold. Under any circumstances.
2. They CAN, however, be "leased" for a finite period (say, 5 years) to a publisher/content provider. Those leases can be exclusive for that period of time. After the lease has expired, the creator/copyright owner, has the option to shop it around.
3. Copyrights should expire XX years after the creator's death. At that point, the work should revert to the public domain. What number should we use? 25 or 50 years maybe?
4. A provision should exist to prevent corporate takeover of copyrighted works. The "you worked for me when you wrote that" provisions in many contracts should be null and void. However, corporations SHOULD be able to own works that they explicitly contracted someone to create on their behalf.
5. Copyrights should expire automatically after 25 years if the work remains unpublished during that time.
I believe that the 5 provisions listed above would have the following imapact:
- The creators would actually profit MORE from their own works. (Instead of publishers)
- This would encourage the publishers to go out and find NEW artists on a more regular basis (yes, the publishing companies would actually have to WORK harder). Because these new artists would tend to be cheaper than the established ones.
- This would force the publishing companies to re-issue material more often or risk it reverting to the public domain.
As far as patent law is concerned, I tend to agree with the majority of posters. The OLD (~20 years ago) interpretation of patent law probably served us better than the current "patent anything" interpretations.
Personally, if the RIAA were really an association of ARTISTS protecting their rights instead of an association of PUBLISHERS protecting their rights to milk the artists, then I'd be more sympathetic to their cause.
Also:
d is c.htm
i ?dbname=1994_uscode&docid=29USC621
http://www.dol.gov/dol/topic/discrimination/age
You can read the actual law (Title 29 USC 621) below: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cg
Basically, the age discrimation laws are to protect the "old" people... The perception is that the "young" people have all of the advantages.
According to the US Dept. of Labor:
m
http://www.dol.gov/dol/wb/public/wb_pubs/age.ht
"Age discrimination" is discriminating against an employee over 40 years of age for "being too old". There is no reference to "being too young". Discriminating against someone for "being too young" is perfectly legal.
I could be wrong about this, but from an anti-discrimination seminar that I attended about 8-10 years ago, I seem to remember that the legal classification of "age discrimination" only applies to people "over 40". (therefore, if you're "under 40" the "age discrimination" laws don't apply).
Actually, try this:
exp sys/change_on_install \
file=expdat.dmp \
rows=n
and then:
imp sys/change_on_install \
file=expdat.dmp \
indexfile=foo.txt
(This will create an ascii file "foo.txt" that contains every create statement for the objects in the database... this includes tables and indexes... I also believe that it will give you the create tablespace statements... note that only the create index statements are "usable"... you will have to un-comment the rest... oh... It may not do stored procedures... been a while since I've used it...)