Yes, I read the whole thing just to see what else it said.
The company technically owes the signing employee at least 6 months of any revenue connected to any project connected to that employee’s position at the time of signing.
It’s supposed to be a salaried compensation point, but is vaguely worded incorrectly enough that it logically says any project connected to that position at all must direct a portion of its revenue to that employee, regardless of any circumstance.
Without any qualifications such as length of hire, time spent on the project, nominal involvement, a minimum of 6 revenue months of projects connected to that position must be directed toward the employee.
Any judge would laugh that out of court.
Yes, I read the whole thing just to see what else it said.
The company technically owes the signing employee at least 6 months of any revenue connected to any project connected to that employee’s position at the time of signing.
It’s supposed to be a salaried compensation point, but is vaguely worded incorrectly enough that it logically says any project connected to that position at all must direct a portion of its revenue to that employee, regardless of any circumstance.
Without any qualifications such as length of hire, time spent on the project, nominal involvement, a minimum of 6 revenue months of projects connected to that position must be directed toward the employee.
Sounds like your flatmate should invest in a lawyer. That company probably owes them a ton of money.