gerald_duck: (dcuk)

(no subject)

posted by [personal profile] gerald_duck at 06:25pm on 07/07/2010
Nobody's suggesting not paying civil servants for the work they've done, though, only giving them less compensation for not giving them any more work to do.
[parent entry] [link] [parent] [reply]
 

(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] wildeabandon.livejournal.com at 10:40am on 08/07/2010
Okay, fine, a contract which paid on delivery of stages, and had a penalty fee for cancelling part way through. Trying to cancel after the first stage without paying the penalty fee would still be a retroactive change of contract.
[link] [parent] [reply]
gerald_duck: (mallard)

(no subject)

posted by [personal profile] gerald_duck at 11:29am on 08/07/2010
OK, an employment contract could be set up that way and/or perceived that way. But that's expecting quite a lot more than the basic you-do-the-work-and-we-pay-you stuff every contract contains.

I've never had an employment contract that gave me those kinds of rights, so I certainly wouldn't take it for granted that civil servants got them.
[link] [parent] [reply]

July

SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
    1
 
 2
 
 3
1
 4
 
 5
 
6
 
 7
 
 8
 
 9
1
 10
 
 11
 
 12
 
13
 
 14
 
 15
 
 16
 
 17
 
 18
 
 19
 
20
 
 21
 
 22
 
 23
 
 24
 
 25
 
 26
 
27
 
 28
 
 29
 
 30
 
 31