TV: Did you make Barry's List?

[Handyman]

Re: TV: Did you make Barry's List?

Well at first it came from donations, then they set up their own bank I thought Sheela said. Plus hey were selling tons of products like the leaders books. Then you had the World Festivals...

 

[SJHovey]

Re: TV: Did you make Barry's List?

Well at first it came from donations, then they set up their own bank I thought Sheela said. Plus hey were selling tons of products like the leaders books. Then you had the World Festivals...

Sure, but then what happened to it? Did the people who fled, like Sheela, really steal millions as Osho alleged?

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: TV: Did you make Barry's List?

Sure, but then what happened to it? Did the people who fled, like Sheela, really steal millions as Osho alleged?

I haven't gotten to that point yet, but given what I've seen of Sheela, I would be very surprised if she didn't steal millions.

 

[Handyman]

Re: TV: Did you make Barry's List?

Sure, but then what happened to it? Did the people who fled, like Sheela, really steal millions as Osho alleged?

I dunno I havent got that far yet My guess is they had contingency plans in plans in place though.

On another note for those who saw Jon Olivers slaughtering of Sinclair Media you might be wondering why some journalists didnt quit instead of reading the BS they are forced to pretend is legit...here is why:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Sinclair employees tell us they're being held hostage by their contracts, which stipulate that they have to pay back wages if they quit <a href="https://t.co/njEAMCCRRb">https://t.co/njEAMCCRRb</a></p>— Rebecca Greenfield (@rzgreenfield) <a href="https://twitter.com/rzgreenfield/status/981183611977322496?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 3, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

The short answer is the cost may be too steep. According to copies of two employment contracts reviewed by Bloomberg, some Sinclair employees were subject to a liquidated damages clause for leaving before the term of their agreement was up: one that requires they pay as much as 40 percent of their annual compensation to the company.

While they were also subject to a six-month non-compete clause and forced arbitration, three current and former Sinclair employees said it was the potential financial penalty that had the greatest impact on those thinking of quitting. Under the clause, there is a specific window of time during which employees can give notice. One current employee who requested anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to speak publicly said the clause’s limitations are the reason he hasn’t quit. An ex-employee who also requested anonymity said both the non-compete and the damages clause dissuaded her at first from looking for work elsewhere.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: TV: Did you make Barry's List?

On another note for those who saw Jon Olivers slaughtering of Sinclair Media you might be wondering why some journalists didnt quit instead of reading the BS they are forced to pretend is legit...here is why:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Sinclair employees tell us they're being held hostage by their contracts, which stipulate that they have to pay back wages if they quit <a href="https://t.co/njEAMCCRRb">https://t.co/njEAMCCRRb</a></p>— Rebecca Greenfield (@rzgreenfield) <a href="https://twitter.com/rzgreenfield/status/981183611977322496?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 3, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

I'm not wondering why they were afraid to quit. I'm wondering why they would sign an agreement in the first place that says that if you quit, you have to pay back 40% of your annual wages and you can't get another job in the industry and compete with us. I would say that's a pretty visible red flag that this company has a problem with employee's quitting and will do anything to stop them from doing so. Apparently no one asked why?

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: TV: Did you make Barry's List?

I'm not wondering why they were afraid to quit. I'm wondering why they would sign an agreement in the first place that says that if you quit, you have to pay back 40% of your annual wages and you can't get another job in the industry and compete with us. I would say that's a pretty visible red flag that this company has a problem with employee's quitting and will do anything to stop them from doing so. Apparently no one asked why?

While I tend to agree, I think the reality is that getting a decent job as a journalist is quite difficult today.

 

[Handyman]

Re: TV: Did you make Barry's List?

Yeah...plus imagine you have worked at the same station for 10 years and they are all of a sudden bought out by Sinclair. Are you going to risk going back on the market possibly having to move or take a lesser job because of a clause in your contract?

 

[Handyman]

Re: TV: Did you make Barry's List?

Sure, but then what happened to it? Did the people who fled, like Sheela, really steal millions as Osho alleged?

I am just getting to this point...and I dont believe the Osho as far as I can throw him. He is using Sheela as a way to cover for the fact that the house of cards is falling apart. He also cant take that she left him basically making him look impotent in the eyes of the world. This guy thrives on being a superstar, and his ego would never allow the betrayal.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: TV: Did you make Barry's List?

I thought non-competes weren’t valid if they prevented you from finding gainful employment. Or something to that effect.

 

[Handyman]

Re: TV: Did you make Barry's List?

I thought non-competes weren’t valid if they prevented you from finding gainful employment. Or something to that effect.

How is it doing that though? They can find other jobs just not media jobs.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: TV: Did you make Barry's List?

Yeah...plus imagine you have worked at the same station for 10 years and they are all of a sudden bought out by Sinclair. Are you going to risk going back on the market possibly having to move or take a lesser job because of a clause in your contract?

I don't think the purchasing company can just force current employees to sign a non-compete. I think normally you have to be given something in exchange, and usually just letting you keep your job isn't sufficient.

 

[Handyman]

Re: TV: Did you make Barry's List?

So wait...is it the contention of the Osho and his followers that he never wanted it to be a religion? They cant be serious right?

 

[SJHovey]

Re: TV: Did you make Barry's List?

So wait...is it the contention of the Osho and his followers that he never wanted it to be a religion? They cant be serious right?

Depends on what issue is being litigated. They argued both ways.

 

[Handyman]

Re: TV: Did you make Barry's List?

I don't think the purchasing company can just force current employees to sign a non-compete. I think normally you have to be given something in exchange, and usually just letting you keep your job isn't sufficient.

They can buy out the rest of your contract and force you to sign a new one if you want to stay.

 

[Handyman]

Re: TV: Did you make Barry's List?

Depends on what issue is being litigated. They argued both ways.

Well seeing as he applied for a permanent Visa as a religious leader it would seem he is full of crap

 

[SJHovey]

Re: TV: Did you make Barry's List?

They can buy out the rest of your contract and force you to sign a new one if you want to stay.

I think in a lot of business sales what they do is force the seller to terminate all employees as part of the sale. Then, the purchasing company reserves the right to interview and hire those employees they choose to hire.

But there are complications with that, and my guess is there are cases out there refusing to enforce non-competes in a scenario where you get "rehired" to do basically the same job in the same location, but by a new boss.

 

[Jimjamesak]

Re: TV: Did you make Barry's List?

One of the stations up here is rumored to be bought out by Sinclair, and sadly it’s the one my father and brother work at.

Also sad, Sinclair owns the only viable competitor to WWE.

 

[unofan]

I thought non-competes weren’t valid if they prevented you from finding gainful employment. Or something to that effect.

This goes beyond my normal expertise, but generally speaking the more specific the job duties and the more specific the prohibition, the more enforceable it will be. Though some states explicitly prohibit them as a matter of public policy (California being the most prominent example).

But, for instance, my understanding is a non compete for a minimum wage entry level job will almost never be enforceable anywhere, while a non compete for a CEO that prohibits him from working for a company in the same industry is more likely to be enforceable everywhere except where explicitly prohibited.

The problem is the minimum wage worker generally won't have the time or money to fight it, so it's defacto enforced.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: TV: Did you make Barry's List?

I have an NCA that enjoins me from being employed by, or doing work for a current client of my employer for a period of 12 months after I am separated (whether I resign or get fired), and from trying to woo clients over to a competitor for 24 months. Notably, it does not say I can't work for a competitor. Taking into account my one business law class from a decade ago , I consider this a lot more legally kosher than the NCA at my last job which supposedly prevented me from working any job in the field for 18 months after separation (they did not try to have it enforced, so I think it was just an empty threat for individual contributors).

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: TV: Did you make Barry's List?

This goes beyond my normal expertise, but generally speaking the more specific the job duties and the more specific the prohibition, the more enforceable it will be. Though some states explicitly prohibit them as a matter of public policy (California being the most prominent example).

But, for instance, my understanding is a non compete for a minimum wage entry level job will almost never be enforceable anywhere, while a non compete for a CEO that prohibits him from working for a company in the same industry is more likely to be enforceable everywhere except where explicitly prohibited.

The problem is the minimum wage worker generally won't have the time or money to fight it, so it's defacto enforced.

That's my extremely limited understanding as well. I knew about California having a fairly broad ban against them. I was under the assumption though that if you're an engineer, your employer can't ban you from taking another engineering job.

Regarding your last sentence, yeah, but that's where a class action lawsuit comes into play if it were ever to happen. But generally I think you're dead on.