Post #2525046
2026-05-14 11:57 UTC
I'm one of those weirdos who, before actually putting my legal signature on something that's potentially binding, prefers to thoroughly read and understand what I'm signing.
I work for a small company. My company works in a market-segment that both has thin margins and high compliance-requirements.
Because of those thin margins, they tend to skimp on "back office" personnel's compensation. That skimping tends to mean that they tend to get people with skills in the lower-end of the hiring pool for those "back office" positions. Sometimes, the lack of skills is due to hiring people that are new to their respective areas of expertise (and, once they gain experience, there tends to be "churn"). Other times, the lack of skills is just because the people aren't high-drive hires (but they don't "churn" because they're content with the responsibilieis/skills vs. compensation-level arrangement).
Unfortunately, this sometimes means that when they need to author and send out compliance-related documents, the wording isn't exactly the best. Stuff written by lawyers tends to be dense, but that's because they're trying to be precise and not leave room for doubt. This is particularly so for documents that people are expected to sign. The "skimping" often means that some documents are written by the "back office" personnel rather than lawyers. As a result, the clarity of such documents often suffers.
This week, I received such a "suffering" document that I was being asked to sign. The document had immediately-abutting sentences that seemed to contradict each other. Futher, the wording around the scope/implications of signing seemed to beg the question, "then why are you asking me to sign this document".
Rather than sign, I took the cautious approach and punted it back, asking for clarification before signing.
Guess we'll see whether that creates a kerfuffle or not. I mean, it shouldn't. I've been with my employer since 2015. This would be far from the first time I've pushed back on something. I mean, a huge part of the reason they hired me is my tendency towards being detail-oriented.
🤷♂️
Replies (1)
-
@ferricoxide@blahaj.zone 2026-05-14 15:19
Also: if you're going to send me something saying "go read this ginormous document that's 90% the same as the last time you read it", how about you send me some kind of diff between the current and the prior document? I write code for a living. I'm used to release-note and/or diffs to save me from having to read EVERYTHING just to find the 10% that changed. Sure, on a one-page document, re-reading everything just to also get that bit of changed material is doable. However, if it's a literal "book", asking me to do that simply is not reasonable.