I know, this is slashdot, who reads the summaries never mind the supporting documents, but the complaint that her lawyer filed includes that was hired as a Sales Executive, Account Manager. She had been making $7,250 a month doing the same work for her previous employer when she was recruited. Please see the second link in the summary.
It's a question of fitness for the job. Do you want your next operation to be performed by someone who hasn't recovered from a 3-day bender but can hide it well?
Cause: person A wants to do something, finds the money and as a result hires person B. Effect: person B has the job, the job was created by person A.
A customer is someone who buys goods or services. Person A is a customer of person B. If person B does not supply the goods or services, they will cease to be a customer of person A, even if it's an employer-employee relationship.
Nobody hires someone they know can't do the job, except in cases of nepotism or fraud. They won't satisfy the customer, who may be their employer.
Bottom line is he wants to sell something he has no legal right to sell. He wants to develop stuff on company time but sell the fruits of that labor as if it were his own, even though legally it is not.
I hope he does ask his employer. That will be one less self-entitled idiot working in IT.
Doctor's medical records are private, which is why they're given to the patient. The patient can disclose them without breaching that privacy, since the record is their own. The pilot went to his regular appointment, but failed to turn in the report that stated he was unfit to fly.
Everyone was told to install the app at the same time as the other employees - it was not a pre-condition to her or anyone else's employment. Please read the actual complaint - the second link in the article.
The guy hid the doctor's assessment that he shouldn't be flying rather than turn it in as required - it was found in his apartment after the crash. So he shouldn't have even been on "work time".
They move on molten rock, but when they collide, superheated steam "lubricates" the sides of the impact, allowing the two plates to slide against each other and relieve the strain. If this didn't happen, earthquakes would be a lot worse, but only until there's no more water and the plates become locked in place, like Venus.
GM and Chrysler both went under due to poor leadership. For GM, the CEO (Ron Wagoneer) continued to depend on sales of gas guzzlers such as Hummers long after it was obvious that people wanted something more economical. In Chrysler's case, it was because of internal problems that had existed from the time that Daimler had acquired them - it was a bad corporate fit - and they should have appointed Bob Lutz instead of Bob Eaton, and they wouldn't have been acquired by Daimler.
Ford, on the other hand, saw the gathering storm clouds, and put in place over $20 billion of loans that they could tap to help weather the storm. They even mortgaged their logo. They also trimmed the number of models, and focused more on fuel economy, which is why they didn't need a bail-out. They had smart management and the right product.
Actually, the supreme court overturned a court of appeals decision that had sided with the company and in the end, walmart is the one who lost. From your link:
Friday's judgment puts an end to the various legal battles initiated by the former employees against Wal-Mart, but the company could decide to contest the amounts owed to its former workers.
The store shut down a few months after the workers became the first Wal-Mart employees in North America to be unionized in 2004. They were negotiating a collective agreement when the store suddenly shut on the same day an arbitrator was appointed to resolve an impasse in negotiations.
The workers, who belonged to the United Food and Commercial Workers union, said it was their union activities that led to the store closure. The union has said the closure was part of a worldwide strategy by the retail giant to stop other workers from unionizing elsewhere.
In the case before the Supreme Court, an arbitrator had agreed with the union, which had argued work conditions were illegally modified because Wal-Mart had not demonstrated, in its opinion, the decision to terminate employees was taken during "ordinary course of the company’s business." For example, if the store was losing money.
The Supreme Court overturned the appeal court decision which had disagreed with the arbitrator.
And many churches are just money-making operations that fleece the flock... and use any charity work for outreach - looking for new recruits. So the charity work is a form of advertising.
Slashdot Mirror
I know, this is slashdot, who reads the summaries never mind the supporting documents, but the complaint that her lawyer filed includes that was hired as a Sales Executive, Account Manager. She had been making $7,250 a month doing the same work for her previous employer when she was recruited. Please see the second link in the summary.
It's a question of fitness for the job. Do you want your next operation to be performed by someone who hasn't recovered from a 3-day bender but can hide it well?
Cause: person A wants to do something, finds the money and as a result hires person B. Effect: person B has the job, the job was created by person A.
A customer is someone who buys goods or services. Person A is a customer of person B. If person B does not supply the goods or services, they will cease to be a customer of person A, even if it's an employer-employee relationship.
Nobody hires someone they know can't do the job, except in cases of nepotism or fraud. They won't satisfy the customer, who may be their employer.
Bottom line is he wants to sell something he has no legal right to sell. He wants to develop stuff on company time but sell the fruits of that labor as if it were his own, even though legally it is not.
I hope he does ask his employer. That will be one less self-entitled idiot working in IT.
Doctor's medical records are private, which is why they're given to the patient. The patient can disclose them without breaching that privacy, since the record is their own. The pilot went to his regular appointment, but failed to turn in the report that stated he was unfit to fly.
We're looking for a pilot you you, Citizen. Please report to the 'B' Ark as soon as possible :-)
Does it fix that stupid auto-play of html5 videos?
From the way you phrased it, it looked like it was the employees who lost. You're right - sorry for the misunderstanding :-)
I read the actual complaint filed with the court. Use the source, Luke; Use the source!. :-)
It's been quantified many times already.
Even a brick will float if you coat it with silicone. And you can boil an egg in a paper bag. News at 11.
Everyone was told to install the app at the same time as the other employees - it was not a pre-condition to her or anyone else's employment. Please read the actual complaint - the second link in the article.
He wasn't a terrorist - he was suicidal from depression. Two different things entirely.
So you're free to fly with pilots who don't undergo medical evaluations or get drunk on their own time before a flight. If you can find one.
The guy hid the doctor's assessment that he shouldn't be flying rather than turn it in as required - it was found in his apartment after the crash. So he shouldn't have even been on "work time".
But the employer didn't know that he was considered not medically fit to fly.
Read the actual complaint - it's not that long.
Person A created the job for person B by paying for it.
And person A is the customer of person B. Same as in any other job. Piss off the customer - your boss - and no job for you.
They move on molten rock, but when they collide, superheated steam "lubricates" the sides of the impact, allowing the two plates to slide against each other and relieve the strain. If this didn't happen, earthquakes would be a lot worse, but only until there's no more water and the plates become locked in place, like Venus.
On a smaller scale, fracking does the same thing.
GM and Chrysler both went under due to poor leadership. For GM, the CEO (Ron Wagoneer) continued to depend on sales of gas guzzlers such as Hummers long after it was obvious that people wanted something more economical. In Chrysler's case, it was because of internal problems that had existed from the time that Daimler had acquired them - it was a bad corporate fit - and they should have appointed Bob Lutz instead of Bob Eaton, and they wouldn't have been acquired by Daimler.
Ford, on the other hand, saw the gathering storm clouds, and put in place over $20 billion of loans that they could tap to help weather the storm. They even mortgaged their logo. They also trimmed the number of models, and focused more on fuel economy, which is why they didn't need a bail-out. They had smart management and the right product.
Friday's judgment puts an end to the various legal battles initiated by the former employees against Wal-Mart, but the company could decide to contest the amounts owed to its former workers.
The store shut down a few months after the workers became the first Wal-Mart employees in North America to be unionized in 2004. They were negotiating a collective agreement when the store suddenly shut on the same day an arbitrator was appointed to resolve an impasse in negotiations.
The workers, who belonged to the United Food and Commercial Workers union, said it was their union activities that led to the store closure. The union has said the closure was part of a worldwide strategy by the retail giant to stop other workers from unionizing elsewhere.
In the case before the Supreme Court, an arbitrator had agreed with the union, which had argued work conditions were illegally modified because Wal-Mart had not demonstrated, in its opinion, the decision to terminate employees was taken during "ordinary course of the company’s business." For example, if the store was losing money.
The Supreme Court overturned the appeal court decision which had disagreed with the arbitrator.
And here: Quebec unionized Wal-Mart workers win Supreme Court victory. There is no appeal from the supreme court. Walmart can "review" the decision all it wants, but now it's about deciding proper compensation.
And many churches are just money-making operations that fleece the flock ... and use any charity work for outreach - looking for new recruits. So the charity work is a form of advertising.
Not in my area - the Supreme Court here ruled that WallyWorld's actions were illegal.
So just choose a manufacturer and model that lets you disable secure boot.
Those who receive a PC as a gift do not have this choice.
And? Most people won't care, or even notice. Those who care tend to buy their own computers.
Point by point:
1. I am definitely not in the USA. But it's odds-on that the OP is.
2. You are assuming that people are rational in their choices. This is false. Always will be.
3. Wrong - he doesn't want ownership. He wants the right to sell the stuff that his boss has sole title to. He's an idiot.
4. Matter of opinion.