Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
MY friend is at her wit's end. She works as a freelancer and first of all she does not have enough hours to make a living. She does about 3 hours a week at 20 bucks a week. Yet her contract says she is not allowed to work for anyone else during a period of her employment here as well as ONE YEAR after her last job. I can understand those restrictions if they give her enough hours. She teaches a foreign language and her courses depend on demand. Is it legal to pay someone 240bucks a week and tell them they cant work elsewhere teaching? She is looking to work at other places but is scared of penalties? She signed this silly contract because at the time its all she could get
is it overseas? it usually was a visa requirement but it is easily ignored....
she can do other work just don't get cuaght....its not like there is a work Gestapo actively hunting down non compete violators.
problem is how to even apply to another school You currently freelance for A you want a jo with B what do you put on your resume? B might be aware that A does not allow you to work for them?
Or do you say you worked for A more than a year ago and hope no one checks? Yeah its overseas.
Doesn't sound like she's a freelancer to me. It sounds more like she's an employee. By definition, freelancers are independent contractors who fill a need for a business that doesn't want the overhead of a full-time employee.
Without knowing where she's located, it's hard to say if it's a normal thing. However, I've been freelancing for several years (admittedly not in the foreign language field) and I've never even been approached about signing a non-compete agreement. My advice would be to get legal advice on whether or not the clause is even enforceable.
Doesn't sound like she's a freelancer to me. It sounds more like she's an employee. By definition, freelancers are independent contractors who fill a need for a business that doesn't want the overhead of a full-time employee.
Without knowing where she's located, it's hard to say if it's a normal thing. However, I've been freelancing for several years (admittedly not in the foreign language field) and I've never even been approached about signing a non-compete agreement. My advice would be to get legal advice on whether or not the clause is even enforceable.
I saw the contract. In the contract the school acknowledges she is not a full time employee and that their school is not her sole form of income. Now I dont understand how they are gonna pay her less than 300 bucks a month and turn around and forbid her to work elsewhere., She works for a chain school.
Inilingua has a very poor reputation both for quality of education and as a place to work. However, I know people who work both for Inilingua and other schools in the US, and they have not mentioned any rules about that. Of course, if it is a visa issue in another country, then that is another matter. Also, that's not freelancing, it's just working part time, possibly on a contract basis.
Inilingua has a very poor reputation both for quality of education and as a place to work. However, I know people who work both for Inilingua and other schools in the US, and they have not mentioned any rules about that. Of course, if it is a visa issue in another country, then that is another matter. Also, that's not freelancing, it's just working part time, possibly on a contract basis.
Would that mean that its enforceable? Oh and they are charging her almost 200 bucks to ""take training"".
Concerning ""visa issue"" freelancers do not need a visa to work there so I guess she is not on a visa?
How is working 6 hours part time? I thought part time is 20hrs a week and full time 40?
Thanks for your input. And yes looks like this place sucks. How are you gonna ask people who make 200 a month to pay for their own training.
I saw the contract. In the contract the school acknowledges she is not a full time employee and that their school is not her sole form of income. Now I dont understand how they are gonna pay her less than 300 bucks a month and turn around and forbid her to work elsewhere., She works for a chain school.
Which is it? She is allowed to have another income, or she is forbidden from working elsewhere?
She is forbidden to teach, translate, edit etc that sort of thing. Basically can not do what that school does for a year after she is done with them. She can not do that either for herself or for other companies.
Seems unfair to me that you can only provide someone with 200 a month and ban them from working in what they are specialized in?
They say they are not her sole means of income. I assume its a clause they use to not pay for healthcare?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. I can understand those restrictions if they give her enough hours. She teaches a foreign language and her courses depend on demand. Is it legal to pay someone 240bucks a week and tell them they cant work elsewhere teaching? She is looking to work at other places but is scared of penalties? She signed this silly contract because at the time its all she could get
