Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
Yes, I read the whole thing just to see what else it said.
The company technically owes the signing employee at least 6 months of any revenue connected to any project connected to that employee’s position at the time of signing.
It’s supposed to be a salaried compensation point, but is vaguely worded incorrectly enough that it logically says any project connected to that position at all must direct a portion of its revenue to that employee, regardless of any circumstance.
Without any qualifications such as length of hire, time spent on the project, nominal involvement, a minimum of 6 revenue months of projects connected to that position must be directed toward the employee.
Yes, I read the whole thing just to see what else it said.
The company technically owes the signing employee at least 6 months of any revenue connected to any project connected to that employee’s position at the time of signing.
It’s supposed to be a salaried compensation point, but is vaguely worded incorrectly enough that it logically says any project connected to that position at all must direct a portion of its revenue to that employee, regardless of any circumstance.
Without any qualifications such as length of hire, time spent on the project, nominal involvement, a minimum of 6 revenue months of projects connected to that position must be directed toward the employee.
Sounds like your flatmate should invest in a lawyer. That company probably owes them a ton of money.