posted by ![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
perldiver at 08:27pm on 15/01/2008 under boilerplate, contracts, emotions, emotions.aggravation, lawyers, legalese
perldiver at 08:27pm on 15/01/2008 under boilerplate, contracts, emotions, emotions.aggravation, lawyers, legaleseI have had this conversation innumerable times over the years, and I still don't get it:
I'm always somewhat dumbstruck by this comment. I'm not sure how to take it; is the person saying:
1) The contract doesn't say quite what I mean, but I couldn't be bothered to modify it so that it did?
2) What the lawyers write into a contract isn't really important; all that matters is that we have a sample of your signature under some words. Most of us senior people here at $COMPANY haven't even read the contract.
3) Even though you are giving your signed word to obey the terms of this contract, you don't need to feel that you are actually bound by it.
4) Yes, what it literally says is quite excessive, but it would not be interpreted that way in a courtroom.
To me, the whole POINT of a contract is that it provides a permanent record that spells out very clearly what two parties expect of one another. The only reason to have a contract is so that both parties know that they have the same understanding, and so that there is something to refer back to if there are questions later. If the contract doesn't say what you really mean, why would you sign it? If it's so murky that you can't understand it, why would you sign it? If you haven't read it, and therefore don't know that it represents your intent, why would you sign it?
More importantly, why would **I** sign it under those conditions?
When I had my first group of lawyers draw up the Wotan contractor contract, I kept telling them that I wanted it written in plain English. I sent it back for six or seven drafts because they kept f&(*^ing it up with legalese that said things other than what I wanted it to say. Finally I just took what they had produced, made the modifications I wanted without further review, and went with it. My contract was four pages long and I thought it was excessive, but most employment contracts are a lot longer than that.
Me: "This paragraph of the contract is really excessive. If you read it literally, it says that I cannot $X." (Where $X is some very reasonable activity like buying groceries.)
Other person (usually potential employer): "Oh, that's just boilerplate, don't worry about it."
I'm always somewhat dumbstruck by this comment. I'm not sure how to take it; is the person saying:
1) The contract doesn't say quite what I mean, but I couldn't be bothered to modify it so that it did?
2) What the lawyers write into a contract isn't really important; all that matters is that we have a sample of your signature under some words. Most of us senior people here at $COMPANY haven't even read the contract.
3) Even though you are giving your signed word to obey the terms of this contract, you don't need to feel that you are actually bound by it.
4) Yes, what it literally says is quite excessive, but it would not be interpreted that way in a courtroom.
To me, the whole POINT of a contract is that it provides a permanent record that spells out very clearly what two parties expect of one another. The only reason to have a contract is so that both parties know that they have the same understanding, and so that there is something to refer back to if there are questions later. If the contract doesn't say what you really mean, why would you sign it? If it's so murky that you can't understand it, why would you sign it? If you haven't read it, and therefore don't know that it represents your intent, why would you sign it?
More importantly, why would **I** sign it under those conditions?
When I had my first group of lawyers draw up the Wotan contractor contract, I kept telling them that I wanted it written in plain English. I sent it back for six or seven drafts because they kept f&(*^ing it up with legalese that said things other than what I wanted it to say. Finally I just took what they had produced, made the modifications I wanted without further review, and went with it. My contract was four pages long and I thought it was excessive, but most employment contracts are a lot longer than that.
aggravated
There are 3 comments on this entry. (Reply.)