I got an email a couple weeks ago requesting help from you all, and debated on how to deal with it since we normally only fundraise for pets and candidates, but it sounds like our fellow commenter got really screwed and maybe we could help:
Hi fellow Juicers
I work as a freelance editor on large projects; training programs, continuing education systems and the like. I worked a 6 month project ending in December. Contract has strong NDAs and work exclusivity. Completed my work on time and sent in in. then BOOM; no response, no payment, no work release allowing to accept new work. Nothing. Hired an attorney and entered pre-trial litigation After extended pre-litigation filings, we have been pushed into an arbitration proceeding using the arb service they contract with. I need to pay my attorney addition fees to file arbitration. This is a massive case (over 41M at stake) and I am a very small fish in this ocean. I already put up $8000 litigating this case. This arbitration proceeding is being used not to resolve the case but drive smaller litigants from the case and thus losing their case by draining them of funds and running through their retainer, while remaining trapped in the contract..I need a total of $6000 ($4000 for initial arbitration filing and $2000 for response). It’s billed at $400/hr and includes $800 filing fee.If this runs on BJ I will pay it forward to the “Walter Fund”. I am precluded by the exclusivity clause from any W-2 or 1099 work until the arbitrator releases me; hence my funds deficit.. I will be released as soon as arbitration filing is accepted. I’m an honest person, I will pay this forward win or lose the litigation. I’ve been a longtime Juicer (2003) mostly an amused lurker who reads everyone’s pet stories 20 times over. Now I need some of my Juicer compadres to slip a ten or twenty into the hat when it passed. Thanks so much..
Planetpundit
When he refers to the Walter fund, he means he will basically just reimburse the website whatever we chip in and send a check to Anne Laurie to deposit and (Anne Laurie told me to pound sand she doesn’t do accounting so I will deal with it or find someone willing) use for emergency pet issues or crises that affect readers who may need a hand. At any rate, I am not a lawyer, but this sounds like something a company would do, and while I am super cautious with what I ask of all of you, I thought I would pass it along and let you all use your own judgment.
Here’s the link.
Doug R
How can he be prohibited from work if he didn’t get paid for the last job? Arbitration sucks, it should be optional for employees.
John
Didn’t we already have a discussion about all the ways this is….odd?
joel hanes
I hit it last time.
Yes, some thought it odd, and he responded with enough info to IMHO allay those concerns.
eemom
It’s a scam. I can’t believe you’re doing this again.
namekarB
Drawbacks to Freelancing from Wikipedia:
For a hamburger today, I will gladly pay you next Tuesday
WaterGirl
Cole, I’ve been keeping an eye on his funding page, but I don’t get paid until the 1st. Maybe you can re-up this again on the 1st, which is a common payday? End of the month is bad timing for those of us who get $ once a month.
WaterGirl
@eemom: What makes you think this one is a scam?
mad citizen
I skimmed this the first time it was posted and it’s way too complicated for me to spend time on to try to understand it. Best of luck.
Chetan Murthy
@WaterGirl: (1) 6mos work with nothing in interim payments, nor escrow? I once did a contract gig with a startup, they were running low on funds, they stopped paying me. I worked for a couple of more weeks, then said “you either make sure I get paid in cash for anything further, or I’m outta here -today-“. They made sure I got paid — *in cash*. They still owe me for about a month … and that was in 1987.
(2) forbidden to work for others, and not getting paid by the original counterparty? That’s bullshit. 100% unadulterated bullshit.
Nobody can stop you from taking work. They need to -sue- you for having done it, and that’s after-the-fact. But regardless, they gotta take you to court, garnish your wages, what else? And all that time, you haven’t been paid. Seems easy to win in court.
(3) And the fact that this is a lurker, with no history in this community, is also suspect.
eemom
There are many reasons, but the main one is that there is no way in hell anybody can enforce an alleged agreement that would prohibit somebody else FROM WORKING AT ALL. Period full stop.
And arbitration or no arbitration, nobody can force anybody else to do anything without a court order. If his alleged adversaries tried to enforce this so called prohibition on work — which they wouldn’t — they’d be laughed out of court. So, arbitration or no arbitration, and invalid contract or no contract — assuming that ANY of what he says is true, which I seriously doubt — an honest person in that position would go get work. Because again, there is not jack shit anybody would even try to do to stop him.
There are a number of other things that stink about his story. But since I AM employed, and have work to do tonight, I don’t have time to elaborate.
If y’all good folks don’t want to believe me, go ahead — throw your hard earned money at a scam artist. Won’t be the first time a schtick like this has succeeded beyond the grifter’s wildest dreams.
eemom
And frankly Cole, what the fuck is wrong with you for posting this shit not once but twice?
WaterGirl
@Chetan Murthy: @eemom: Thanks to both of you for laying out your reasons. What you say makes sense.
eemom
@mad citizen:
He was counting on that.
Rand Careaga
I sent coin. Certainly hope the cause is legit. If not, I’d like to know the story someday.
Another Scott
@Chetan Murthy: He’s been here since at least 2014. A quick Google search would tell you that if you bothered to look before assuming the worst.
What has happened to this blog?? We’ve taken to eating our own now??
Get a grip, people. He’s not scamming us, he’s not a troll, and he’s not an idiot.
Contribute to help a decent person who has been here for years, or don’t. But quit assuming anyone who needs help and asks for it here is some sort of monster. If you want to punch down, keep your comments off this thread, go join the GOP, and buy a MAGA hat.
(Grumble, grumble, grumble….)
Cheers,
Scott.
(Who just donated again.)
Steeplejack
@Chetan Murthy:
Planetpundit has comments going back at least to November 2017.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@Chetan Murthy:
I’ve seen comments from him; not a lot, but some comments.
Omnes Omnibus
@Chetan Murthy:
Not true. I am agnostic on the rest.
Ruckus
It is possible that he has a no compete clause that he feels is enforceable. It’s possible that he is a contractor in a field that is very small and any work by him would be noticed. Any company that treats an employee or contractor like this has no reason not to fuck with him if he tried to get work on another contract.
I have no real reason not to believe him, even if the story is rather suspect for all the reasons stated in the last post and in this one. But we have the shitgibbon as president, we have nazis openly running for office, the powers that buy whatever they want are taking another run at stealing even more money. These are not normal times, some employers are willing to fuck employees/contractors if it means an extra latte once a month.
Pitch in, don’t pitch in but calling this a scam just because it’s abnormal may be 100% correct or it just might be 100% wrong. At least it’s a new scam if it is one.
MJS
@Another Scott: I’m staying out of the debate as to whether this is a scam or not, but signing a non-compete that allows for no work whatsoever, of any type, even in case of non-payment, and looking to sink $14,000 into an arbitration in which he has no guarantee of prevailing seems foolhardy at best. He would probably be better off asking for help with legal fees IF he’s sued for taking other work in these circumstances (a huge “if”). This seems like throwing good money after bad. YMMV.
eric U.
I know someone that couldn’t get a job for over a year because his previous employer (that laid him off) would threaten to sue any company that tried to hire him. Finally got some crusty old millionaire to give him a job for his startup. There was a suit, but the old employer finally lost. Best part was it was all state government grant money being used to pay the lawyers.
DanR
He should post the language of his contract (unpaid) that says he can’t do any other W-2 or 1099 work. It just doesn’t come close to passing the smell test.
Unless his real name is John Fogerty.
Another Scott
@MJS: I think we all know that what’s sensible and what’s right and what’s true doesn’t protect one from legal action. People can be, and are, sued for vengeful reasons. And we know from Scalia and others on the SCOTUS that “actual innocence” is no protection. And I think we all recognize that it’s easy to argue in the abstract when one’s livelihood isn’t on the line.
As you know, but for the benefit of others reading this thread, he gave many more details later in the original thread. I hope people will read (or re-read) that before throwing stones.
My $0.02.
Cheers,
Scott.
Ruckus
@MJS:
This may all be true. But what if it isn’t?
@eric U.:
This is not the first case I’ve heard of like this. It’s rare but some people get such a bug up their ass about how much they own employees that I’d give it better than 65% on the real possible scale.
Think about it this way, maybe he’s good enough at his trade that if he does work at competitor, that competitor could possibly easily crush the first company. That might just make the first company unable to continue, which of course if he’s that good, him not working for them might be doing anyway. They are stuck, they can’t pay him for whatever reason, out of money, boss an idiot, idea found to be illegal by the legal dept., etc. So he takes his knowledge to another company which has a slightly different slant and can make whatever legally, first company fucked, second company success.
Chetan Murthy
@Another Scott: Contracts are void when either party fails to abide by them. Either party.
But sure, maybe this is all legit.
pat
I read his extended comments. Would be nice if he knew the difference between “affect” and “effect” and “it’s” and “its.”
Sorry, two of my personal pet peeves. Along with their and there.
Why yes, I am old.
Steeplejack
@pat:
Then how can you even read this blog? It’s a charnel house of bad punctuation and homophone confusion.
Another Scott
@Chetan Murthy: Funny, I thought that a civil court had to decide when a contract was void (if there was any dispute about it).
Let’s see… FindLaw:
HTH!
(sigh)
Cheers,
Scott.
pat
@Steeplejack:
Oh for pete’s sake, I read it for the occasional grammatical corrections!
Another Scott
@pat:
pete’sPete’sFIFY.
Cheers,
Scott.
(Who recognizes now that you’re trolling us. ;-)
eemom
@Another Scott:
Yeah, and like I said at the time, his “many more details” were just as suspect as his first set.
But once again — if it’s important to you to give this guy the benefit of the doubt, by all means throw your money at him. Maybe you’ll get points for your generosity at the pearly gates someday.
Make sure it’s a $10 or $20 though — he did specify that. So no $5s or $1s. Though if you ask really nicely, he might accept a $50 or $100.
Steeplejack
@pat:
Probably should have a comma after that “Oh.”
NotMax
@pat
For Pete’s sake.
:)
eemom
Upon review of further comments…..God, you people are idiots.
His being a lurker or not is the issue? The number of times he’s posted? He’s “one of our own”?
The fact that people get screwed every day all the time in this fucked up country PROVES that this particular guy is legit….no matter how implausible his story?
Sweet jumping Jesus.
Originally I said, meaning well, that it’s easy to part “good” people from their money; but upon this insane doubling down I think I’ll revert to the original “fools”.
Or maybe it’s we working people who are the fools, for not getting in on money this easy.
Steeplejack
@eemom:
My specific point, and I believe Omnes’s, is that lately some have been (too) quick to label some commenters as trolls or untrustworthy because those commenters have no commenting history—when in fact they do.
As for the rest, opinions differ. You have made yours very clear.
Brickley Paiste
@Chetan Murthy:
I think the 3rd point is wrong but the others are dead on
I am not an expert on employment law – I’ve only litigated 10 or 15 such cases over my career. But I guaran-goddamn-tee it that something is very wrong with the story.
The most charitable interpretation is that the poster is either getting scammed by his/her lawyer or is the victim of legal malpractice. Because, NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO you cannot enforce a contract that you are actively violating and NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO a contract that amounts to indentured servitude without consideration is NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT enforceable.
?BillinGlendaleCA
@DanR: …or Bruce Springsteen.
Brickley Paiste
@Another Scott:
Findlaw … holy fucking christ on a cross of popsicle sticks.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I hear what you are saying about “logic” there Bertrand, but I gots me a pamphlet right here that supports my po-zih-shun.
Brickley Paiste
@eemom:
But, but, but, the fact that I throw money at a wholly implausible scenario is but proof of the purity of my heart. Sure, anybody can give to legitimate, verified, proven charities – but my offering elevates my soul, you see.
Or something like that because, frankly, the whole stance is baffling to me.
Chacal Charles Calthrop
I posted in the original threat & Ill say it here again: for this story to make sense at all, there must be a binding arbitration clause in the original contract. Which means it’s malpractice for his lawyer to have started litigation, and equally wrong for the bad corporation in this story to sue him for taking work outside of or beyond the contact. As a licensed attorney, I offered to read said contract & interpret it, to which offer no-one has responded.
I don’t think this started as a scam, but it may be turning into one.
Gin & Tonic
I’m not smart like all you lawyers here, and I must have missed the first time this went up, but this dude worked as a freelance editor under a contract which has not only an NDA, and a non-compete, but prohibits him from working *anywhere* for *anybody*? So he can’t pay the rent by selling paint at Home Depot? On what planet is such a contract enforceable?
Corner Stone
@Gin & Tonic: There’s nothing about this that makes any sense.
eemom
@Steeplejack:
Labeling someone as a troll or untrustworthy with respect to their comments on the substantive matters discussed on this blog (though what the hell “untrustworthy” means in that context, I’m sure I don’t know) is a whole different ball game from giving credence to a cyber panhandler whose story doesn’t add up because they’re confirmed to have posted comments here at some point. Not the same ballpark, not the same motherfucking sport.
And now please excuse me while I retrieve my jaw from the floor where it has landed at the spectacle of YOU being on board with this nonsense.
Amir Khalid
I think it’s the JurassicPork effect at work here. We have all been so offended by that failed blogger’s pleading for money to tide him over a suspiciously regular series of misfortunes that, when someone else comes along seeking help, our reaction is to suspect them too of being a professional beggar. That was my own reaction the first time John Cole posted this bleg. I would want to assume the bleg did pass JC’s own smell test before he put it up.
eemom
@Chacal Charles Calthrop:
Quelle surprise. On the other hand, he probably was so delightfully surprised with the haul he got from that first thread that he had no reason to even pretend to respond. Never in his wildest dreams did he think he’d get a second and third shot at the gold mine of suckers he lucked into here.
Steve in the STL
@Steeplejack: guy at dinner said “honing in”. I kicked him off the bargaining team and made him pay for his own dinner.
Steve in the STL
@Gin & Tonic: Planet Roberts/Alito/Thomas/Gorsuch/Kavanaugh?
Viva BrisVegas
Kunta Kinte had a similar problem.
Beware the stranger who feels the need to assure you that they are an “honest person”.
Another Scott
@Gin & Tonic: FTFNYT from 2014:
The world of employment is different now than in the Ward Cleaver and Steve Douglas days…
Cheers,
Scott.
Gin & Tonic
@Another Scott: I’ve been in tech for 25+ years. I understand non-competes. They don’t prevent a software engineer from working as, say, a chef. They’re not used to say “you can’t work for *anyone* doing *anything*” as is alleged in this bleg.
Gin & Tonic
@Steve in the STL: Sounds fair.
Chetan Murthy
@Another Scott: And I note again: he didn’t get paid. Yeah sure the employer can try to sue him; He didn’t get paid for his work. Dude, I can sue you tomorrow for infliction of distress; doesn’t mean I have a real case. Does that mean I can come ask for help with my attorney’s fees, too?
Steeplejack
@eemom:
No, people have been labeling someone as a troll or untrustworthy because of a (perceived) lack of previous comments by that person.
Steeplejack
@Steve in the STL:
Well done.
Another Scott
@Gin & Tonic: I don’t read his original bleg, nor the longer explanation, as saying that he can’t work flipping burgers. But that’s not his profession. He said, as I read it, that can’t work in his profession until this is resolved.
Given the example of fast food workers having similar non-compete contracts in the FTFNYT story from 2014, I don’t see why it’s so impossible to accept that Planetpundit would be bound by similar non-compete and mandatory arbitration language in the contract he signed as a freelance editor.
FWIW.
Cheers,
Scott.
PJ
Chiming in to say that the whole thing smells. I have never been an employment lawyer, but the blegger described his predicament in vague terms that made little sense in basic legal terms – if he has an actual lawyer, he has misunderstood what his lawyer said, or his lawyer has given him very bad advice. As others have mentioned, non-competes have varying enforceability depending on jurisdiction, but he says he hasn’t been paid, which means the contract has been breached so the non-compete can’t be enforced in any event. Also, even if the non-compete was enforceable, he could get a job in another field. And if there is an arbitration clause in the contract, why did his lawyer insist on filing a lawsuit? And how can the company threaten to sue him for working (when they haven’t paid him) before going through arbitration? That the guy is unwilling or unable to be more specific about the issue and yet is asking strangers for money is another red flag.
wjs
I have a difficult time believing that someone educated at St. Olaf would write what was on the GoFundMe page. Then I checked his LinkedIn page. The guy studied under Howard Hong? Professor Hong would have torn up his first draft and made him rewrite it.
Baffling, to say the least. You want to believe in the goodness of people, but Jeez, man. At least convince me you could be an editor.
middlelee
Right now I have enough that I can afford to help out occasionally, as I did on John’s first go-around with this person. I prefer to take a chance on people and maybe I do get scammed every couple of years; that’s something I’m willing to risk. I think John has a world class shit detector and I’m going with that.
wjs
@Another Scott: On his LinkedIn page, he estimates that he has delivered 100K pizzas. Not a burger flipper, per se, but rather accomplished at surviving on tips.
Lynn Dee
@Chetan Murthy:
Perhaps the particular kind of freelancing he does is through a centralized system so that, if the work exclusivity over his head hasn’t been released, would-be employers won’t hire him. A kind of “lien,” if you will.
PJ
@wjs: It is pretty odd that someone who claims they are a writer/editor cannot write a pitch without spelling errors that sounds like it was written by a native English speaker.
Lynn Dee
@Gin & Tonic:
No, of course not. It wouldn’t be for anybody anywhere. It would be in his chosen line of work.
J.
I have been a freelance editor and writer for over 25 years and something is really off about this. Not that I haven’t been stiffed. I have. (And my husband, who is an entrepreneur, has also been stiffed, for far more money.) But who was he working for, the Mafia? You cannot prevent someone from ever working again — just not enforceable — and he wasn’t paid. So the contract should be void anyway. Also, did you people read what he wrote? I edited textbooks, among other things, and his writing could have used an editor. (Granted, I suck at editing myself, but still.)
Lynn Dee
@J.:
Whether it’s enforceable may not be the issue. Sure, he could go to court and sue the company and get … what? a declaratory judgment that the non-compete wasn’t enforceable? And then do what? Take the judgment to a potential employer and show them: “See? The courts say I’m fine so ya gotta hire me if the only reason you weren’t is you think I’m still tied up in this non-compete agreement”? We should all be able to see how ridiculous a scenario that is. (And isn’t fighting this what he says he’s doing now, only he’s being forced to do it in arbitration rather than in court?)
I’m not saying to help this guy out. I know nothing about him or what happened, or whether this isn’t just a scam. But the notion he’s protected against the real world effects of a misapplied non-compete agreement because a court would find, after a round of expensive litigation, that the non-compete wasn’t enforceable — or that it wouldn’t be another huge expense if he decided to go that route anyway — is absurd.
Another Scott
@Lynn Dee: +1
Thanks.
Cheers,
Scott.
worn
@PJ: After reading the comments for the second go-round, I was motivated to visit the GoFundMe site and read the pitch. And I am in complete agreement with your and wjs’ assessment of the writing.
But then again, I was raised by two editors, one of whom was the Managing Editor of the Atlanta paper back in the 80’s. This leaves me unconvinced that the GFM pitch was in fact composed by an editor.
That said, I want to think the best of people (an increasingly hard row to hoe, given the current socio-political climate). So at some level I really hope that I am incorrect.
eemom
@Lynn Dee:
You miss the point. He doesn’t need to go to court to get the thing declared unenforceable. He just needs to get a fucking job and not worry about it, because, due to the fact that it’s unenforceable, nobody’s going to even TRY to enforce it.
Also — delivered 100,000 pizzas? Really? Anybody wanna have a crack at that math?
Holy shit, I never knew how right PT Barnum was before now. And y’all are SMART people. Or so I thought.
PJ
@eemom: I know of a case where, just to be dicks, the employer tried to enforce a non-compete in a situation where it had clearly not been violated because the employee was important enough to them and they wanted to make his life painful (they eventually dropped the case, but they got to enjoy making his life difficult.) But this guy is supposedly a low-level contractor, and the employer is supposedly broke enough that they can’t pay anyone, so they definitely would not be spending the dough on attorneys to sue him over a contract that they broke which supposedly requires disputes to be arbitrated and which, as described by the guy, appears to contain a non-compete which is so broad as to be unenforceable in any jurisdiction.
eemom
@PJ:
And once again, non-compete ain’t the same as not work at all. Nuh-uh. This whole thing is fucking ridiculous.
Percysowner
@eemom: I am a smart person, generally and I give myself a certain amount of money per month that I’m willing to give to people who seem to be in need. A lot of that goes to people I follow on social media, a lot goes to creators I subsidize on Patreon. Every now and then I give some money to an unknown case relayed to me by places like BJ. Is this person legit? Heck if I know for sure. I didn’t give that much and if I got conned, well then that’s on him. I didn’t lose anything I can’t afford to lose.