Legal Contracts question

[archenemy]

What exactly constitutes a legal document? Specifically, what about "release forms" that potential employees are asked to sign to allow background checks. I got one recently that said they could check my "standard and mode of living" and "general reputation" and a bunch of difuse sounding aspects of my life. Furthermore, they had a long paragraph in there saying I agree not to file any complaint or persue any suit against them if they misuse my information, libel or slander me (no kidding--it called that out), etc. etc.

 

I always get background checks done as a part of my work (pretty standard for my field within IT) and don't have a problem with it (that is, when they check criminal, credit, employment, education). But this last form seemed outrageous to me. Is a form like this actually a legally binding document?

 

I ended up crossing out the lines that I found unnacceptable and initialed/dated them. I was told that the company will not process anyone who changes this contract. I started to wonder if it really was a legal contract at all. Can one of you Legal Eagles help enlighten me here?

[olyclimber]

don't have to be a lawyer to know that is total BS. unless you really need the job, tell them to stuff it.

[catbirdseat]

Was there a line asking which discussion groups you belong to? Leave that one blank too.

[archenemy]

don't have to be a lawyer to know that is total BS. unless you really need the job, tell them to stuff it.

I already did that.

But I'd really like to know more about the legal aspect of this.

I looked up contracts and saw that there are three requirements of a legal document, and this document meets all three. But certainly I should never waive my right to a complaint if something is mishandled, no? And even if that doesn't preclude me from actually complaining afterwards, what about beforehand (as I did).

Do I have any recourse about not having any say over this contract (if it really is one)? I was already hired on, I just refused bits and pieces of this paperwork?

Where is Judge Judy when I need her?

[jordop]

waiving the right to go after them if they libel you is the most grandiose case of simultaneous corporate asscovering and chestpuffing I have heard all morning

[archenemy]

Actually, the company that does the search (and with whom I would have signed the contract) is COMSYS, a private company. But it is, indeed, asscovering at its most disgusting.

 

edited for clarity:

Comsys is the parent company

Sterling is the background search company

Edited November 1, 2006 by archenemy

[cj001f]

I tired including a BJ clause in my latest hiring. Didn't go so well.

[archenemy]

Maybe you don't give a very good one.

[dt_3pin]

Mutual consent is key. If the parties do not agree to the material terms of the agreement, there is likely no contract.

 

Your marked up version of the contract could potentially be considered a counter-offer.

Edited November 1, 2006 by dt_3pin

[archenemy]

Thank you--that is how I viewed it too. Is that unusual? Or do contracts often go through that process in an employee hiring process? I figure we negotiate everything else, why not that?

[cj001f]

Maybe you don't give a very good one.

 

would explain the lack of promotions.

[catbirdseat]

Thank you--that is how I viewed it too. Is that unusual? Or do contracts often go through that process in an employee hiring process? I figure we negotiate everything else, why not that?

Everything is negotiable. If they really want your services, they will agree to the terms as modified by you.

[foraker]

I suppose it depends on the nature of the job they're asking you to do as well and who the client is. If it's a DoD or DoE contract job, then it's likely you'll have to suffer through having your life examined. If the job doesn't require a gov't clearance though I don't see why they should be allowed to pry. Not quite sure of the law though. But, hey, if you aren't guilty of anything it shouldn't bother you right? ;-) (NB, this is not an opinion I hold for those of you lacking a sarcasm gene)

[cj001f]

If it's a DoD or DoE contract job, then it's likely you'll have to suffer through having your life examined. If the job doesn't require a gov't clearance though I don't see why they should be allowed to pry.

 

Clearances (at least the lower ones) aren't nearly that invasive. You can get a temporary with not much more than a credit/criminal records check.

[foraker]

Yeah, I was thinking more of the TS clearances and above.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

What exactly constitutes a legal document? Specifically, what about "release forms" that potential employees are asked to sign to allow background checks. I got one recently that said they could check my "standard and mode of living" and "general reputation" and a bunch of difuse sounding aspects of my life. Furthermore, they had a long paragraph in there saying I agree not to file any complaint or persue any suit against them if they misuse my information, libel or slander me (no kidding--it called that out), etc. etc.

 

I always get background checks done as a part of my work (pretty standard for my field within IT) and don't have a problem with it (that is, when they check criminal, credit, employment, education). But this last form seemed outrageous to me. Is a form like this actually a legally binding document?

 

I ended up crossing out the lines that I found unnacceptable and initialed/dated them. I was told that the company will not process anyone who changes this contract. I started to wonder if it really was a legal contract at all. Can one of you Legal Eagles help enlighten me here?

 

this is total BS.

[archenemy]

Yeah, I was thinking more of the TS clearances and above.

Yes, I have had to get a full FBI background check for the airport.

 

But this is different. My issue is the company expecting me to give up my rights to complain if they do a shitty job or wrong me in some way.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Yeah, I was thinking more of the TS clearances and above.

Yes, I have had to get a full FBI background check for the airport.

 

But this is different. My issue is the company expecting me to give up my rights to complain if they do a shitty job or wrong me in some way.

 

I'll bet it's not legally binding. But I'm no lawyer (thank God).

[cj001f]

Yeah, I was thinking more of the TS clearances and above.

 

They don't do the neighbor interviews like they used too (no budget)

[archenemy]

Did they used to do that? Crazy.

I understand they don't really do that, but that's just more reason why that should not be included in something they ask people to sign.

 

I am surprised by how often I have to repeat that a background check is not a problem. Agreeing that I won't take action against a company that misuses my information is what I find unacceptable. If the form is not legally binding, then why require it? And why put people in an ethical bind by asking them to agree to something via a signature when they don't agree with the statement? Doesn't that seem wrong?

[Dechristo]

They want to know of your willingness to be owned.