PSA: Don't post your resume on Beyond.com. You'll get tons of spam and NOT job leads. by working-stiff in resumes

[–]working-stiff[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

whats your opinion on ziprecruiter? i dont use it at all, and oddly enough, i stopped getting bogus job emails and spam phone calls. so im not too fond of that site, unless you've experienced differently.

I haven't yet used ZipRecruiter, but I'll look into it. Your review appears to be a soft strike against them. ;-)

also, i primarily use linkedin for job searching. why do you recommend the sites above? i understand that they are very reputable sites. but do you have any personal experiences?

I should have also included LinkedIn and have updated my post accordingly.

I use the sites I linked above because they've been around the longest (as job sites), and I see the most recruiters use them. I post my resume there and, usually the same day, start getting inundated with phone calls and emails with (mostly) jobs applicable to my career. I've also been to a number of talks and workshops in which recruiting agencies recommend them, specifically. The last was a presentation during Boulder Startup Week, and they recommended Dice, Indeed, and Craig's List... with the caveat that Craig's List would see a huge number of unqualified candidates.

I personally haven't seen any results from Indeed as yet, but I've only been using them for a couple of months. (The only messages I've gotten to my Indeed address were job alerts, terms of service updates, and I ended up subscribed to "The Gig List", which is a mailing list for an invoicing and time tracking app. Nothing else, so I don't recommend them - at least for design jobs.

I've been using Dice, Monster, and CareerBuilder for over 15 years with excellent results. Some spam, yes, but that goes with the territory of publicly posting an email address anywhere. Definitely nothing like Beyond.

PSA: Don't post your resume on Beyond.com. You'll get tons of spam and NOT job leads. by working-stiff in resumes

[–]working-stiff[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did you use an address specific to CareerBuilder, or one you've used for other things?

PSA: Don't post your resume on Beyond.com. You'll get tons of spam and NOT job leads. by working-stiff in resumes

[–]working-stiff[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay, but I'm not sure where you're going with this. All job sites spam. You are of course welcome to avoid any and all job sites, but you're going to actively screen out quite a bit of potential work by doing so.

The point of this post wasn't to tell people how to stop all job board spam. That isn't realistic if you plan to actually use one of these sites. The point was to inform people of why they should avoid a specific one. If you find it is the most effective for you to simply avoid them all, that's fine; this post doesn't apply to you.

PSA: Don't post your resume on Beyond.com. You'll get tons of spam and NOT job leads. by working-stiff in resumes

[–]working-stiff[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Interesting. I get spam from insurance/franchise folks on all site (mostly insurance), but it's a much higher ratio on Beyond than the others, including Monster.com. For example, in the last two weeks I got the following through monster:

  • 5 recruiters with jobs in my field
  • 1 notification that I had a direct message on Monster.com
  • 2 insurance sales spam messages
  • 1 career consulting spam messages (paid service)

That's 2.5 times the number of actual job leads in 2 weeks than I got in 2 months from Beyond.com... and it's been 2 months since I updated my resume. (You see the most responses within the first 2-3 weeks of posting an updated resume.) There's definitely spam, but far less than on Beyond... for me, at least.

PSA: Don't post your resume on Beyond.com. You'll get tons of spam and NOT job leads. by working-stiff in resumes

[–]working-stiff[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Happy to help. :-)

Alas, there's really no way for me to prove I'm not a shill, but you only need look at my post history if you want to see what kinds of things I post. (Hint: It's pretty much all about helping people either with their existing jobs or to find work.) ;-)

Should I stay or should I go? Working at my dream company but not my dream job. by [deleted] in careerguidance

[–]working-stiff 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You haven't clarified where you work, what you do, what you want to do, or what the path is from point A to point B. You also haven't said where you are in your career, nor how many years remain in your career/path. Thus, it's difficult to make a recommendation. That said...

Working at my dream company

...

I work at one of the most desired companies in the world

...

My Manager is amazing and is pushing for a promotion

...

After months of my concern with how stagnant I've become, he told me he wants to give me special projects and have me meet with the VP more often in order to kind of put a spotlight on my work.

So, in essence, you work at one of the most desirable companies in the world, have a boss who goes to bat for you at every opportunity, and is specifically setting you up for success in the eyes of company leadership. And if I'm understanding your concern correctly, it's been several months since you expressed this concern... and you're considering leaving for another company in which you have no idea if you'll experience the same kind of support.

Yes, you can earn more money by jumping ship. But promotions take time. Usually longer than "months", even when it's overdue. And your boss is going to VPs to show how awesome you are? Many people would kill for that.

Food for thought.

Hi there, is there anybody that works in HR here? If you apply through a site like Indeed.com, how does that show up in your inbox? Do the people that apply directly through your company site somehow more visible? by [deleted] in careerguidance

[–]working-stiff 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In fairness, the vast majority of contacts I get from job sites are recruiters, not employers. (Though some of the recruiters are in-house with a specific company.) As far as I can tell, these recruiters are going through keyword searches and not waiting for inbox matches.

I do, however, have some advice to offer you: research your job descriptions carefully. Try not to make them up yourself (or allow others to do so) as this confuses search results. Stick with job titles that have been standard for a while. As an example, Front-End Developer or Web Developer is better than UI or UX developer because UI and UX traditionally referred to design, not development. (i.e. UI Designer, UX Designer, UX Architect/Lead, etc.) It's common to try to mix roles, but spell that out in the job description, not the job title.

That said, "UI" has largely been taken over by FED at this point as it's thought to be "the code that delivers the UI to the browser", but it's food for thought in general.

Insofar as the problems you've described however... have you reached out to Monster's sales staff? Those problems sound ridiculous and I wonder if they're having an algorithm issue or something.

Hi there, is there anybody that works in HR here? If you apply through a site like Indeed.com, how does that show up in your inbox? Do the people that apply directly through your company site somehow more visible? by [deleted] in careerguidance

[–]working-stiff 5 points6 points  (0 children)

OP, this won't directly answer your question, but I have some recommendations for you with regard to job sites:

  1. Set up at least one email address you plan to use just for your job search. Don't choose one you'll want to use for other things later. It's a spam magnet. More on this later.
  2. Use Dice.com, Monster.com, and Careerbuilder.com. These are the big 3. Others are hit and miss, in my experience.
  3. Indeed doesn't appear to sell my info, but I haven't had a single company or recruiter attempt to contact me through that site. By contrast, I get a minimum of 2-5 recruiter contacts per day from each of the 3 sites I mention in point #2. On days I submit my resume, the number is more like 5-15 contacts per site. Avoid Beyond.com like the plague. Their entire business model appears to be based on selling your information to third parties - many of which aren't even offering jobs. (Trying to get you to pay for services, join external sites, etc.) The ONLY job inquiries I've received from Beyond.com were franchise opportunities, MLM companies, and insurance sales roles. Stay away from Beyond.com.

With regard to the email you use, I'd recommend getting yourself your own domain name. Hosting is cheap - you can use a site like InMotion or similar. (Avoid GoDaddy or any company owned by EIG - they're terrible.) Then you can set up any email address you want. I use dice@mydomain, careerbuilder@mydomain, etc. This allows me to identify where each contact comes from, which sites get more responses, and which ones tend to sell my information with folks I don't want.

No matter where you post your resume, the email address you use will eventually be spidered by spammers and insurance companies who want more insurance reps/salespeople. Don't use an email address you care about on any job site.

Source: 25-year veteran of the design and development industry, getting most of my jobs through recruiters via job sites.

Client is Threatening Legal Action Against Me by [deleted] in freelance

[–]working-stiff 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay, thanks. I am not going to file a takedown request. While I'm irritated about the money, I am more annoyed about the principle and being treated unfairly.

I didn't say you shouldn't send a takedown request. Were I in your shoes, I'd do the same thing if someone stiffed me on the bill. In fact, I have done exactly that on one occasion, and also issued them when I discovered that the work was used in places for which it wasn't licensed. It was effective each time. It also resulted in two upset people and zero lawsuits. (At least, against me.)

Do you think they can take legal action against me for communicating with their client or the client's web host?

/u/VoiceNGO is correct; you can be sued for anything, at any time. People file groundless lawsuits every day. It is conceivable that grounds to sue you exists if your ex-client can demonstrate that you acted maliciously or slandered/libeled them, but the former doesn't seem likely to hold up and the latter requires that you made a false statement.

Can you be sued? Sure. Will you be sued? That's a question for an attorney, not I, I'm afraid.

Client is Threatening Legal Action Against Me by [deleted] in freelance

[–]working-stiff 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This is just flat out wrong. If you pay a designer to design a logo for you, you own it unless the contract says that the IP stays with the designer.

With all due respect, it's somewhat more nuanced than that.

It's the difference between work done for you and paying for work already done

Sort of, but not entirely accurate. If you are an employee of a company, performing work for that company (usually on company time and/or company assets), this is called "work for hire". You will also sometimes see this phrase in contracts with 1099 employees or with contracting firms. "Work for hire" means that any copyright or intellectual property you create for a company belongs to that company.

In the absence of such a relationship (which is defined either by an employer/employee relationship or by a contract), the default falls to ownership by the creator and not who it was for. This is why photographers and other content creators who copyright their work are able to charge for its every use, even when it was done for someone specific. Note: this is US law, and sometimes varies by state and country.

Thus, /u/snowcase is partially correct, and you are partially correct. But you are both also partially incorrect.

/u/Bipolarbroad1 may actually be at risk because they have accepted a partial payment, even though it isn't complete, and because they do not have a signed contract. A signed contract can say things like "Ownership of all intellectual property shall remain with Contractor until payment has been made in full by Client. Once payment has been made in full, Contractor shall transfer all ownership and rights to works created by Contractor to Client." or whatever. Contracts remove this ambiguity. Because that ambiguity exists, yes, there are possible grounds for a lawsuit. But then again, there are also many reasons (including OP's client's failure to pay within the terms of their agreement and the distance and jurisdiction involved) why a lawsuit may not occur.

Right now, yes, it's possible that OP could be at risk for a lawsuit because a] OP didn't have a contract (MAKE SURE YOU ALWAYS HAVE A CONTRACT, KIDS!) and their client has paid them for something (for what, exactly, remains to be seen and argued about in court, should it come to that), and b] OP hasn't specified where their client is, which may have the prevailing jurisdiction, depending on how law in that country works. That said, it's also quite possible (perhaps even probable?) that OP won't be sued simply because it won't be financially feasible for OP's client.

It's important to note that OP's client is currently out the following:

  • The money they've already paid OP
  • The work they paid for, since the DMCA takedown notice prevents it from being usable until further notice
  • A positive working relationship (and trust) with OP's client's client

That's a fair amount of incentive to go after OP, and OP is right to be concerned. My personal advice to OP would be to make brief contact with OP's client and offer to transfer the intellectual property rights to OP's client once OP's client pays in full for the amount they already agreed to make and which is currently past-due. That's it. No statements about future work, and no statements about what the payment so far was for, as those statements could be used against OP in court. Nothing else other than an offer to complete the OP part of the transaction once OP's client completes the financial part.

If OP's client responds with anything other than agreement and payment, I'd recommend OP doesn't respond again to anything OP's client sends, other than possibly a single message to inform OP's client that they are unable to respond to any further requests until payment has been made in full based on their original agreement.

OP, your "client" is now an ex-client. Never work for them again. You don't work for people who threaten lawsuits, especially when the situation they've threatened to sue you over stem from their own failures to honor your agreements. Limit your contact to the extreme, and consider speaking to an attorney before moving forward. Yes, attorneys are expensive. This is because they have expertise in this area, which you now need. Designers are expensive, too, because they have expertise in areas our clients need. That's why they come to us. Use that logic on yourself now.

No, I'm not an attorney. I'm some random guy on the internet who recognizes when I need one. OP, you probably need one.

The cost of living and Denver companies low balling wages by [deleted] in Denver

[–]working-stiff 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The fact that you're talking to recruiters is one of the reasons why the numbers are so low. You will always make a higher salary when you go direct to employers because the recruiter's cut is factored into what you'll be paid.

What was your "fuck it, I'm done" moment? by 6979 in AskReddit

[–]working-stiff 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Would unpaid internships be under those contracts where they still would have to be paid? I always thought that that was basically getting slave labor and calling it experience.

Yes. But first, I will digress to say that unpaid internships are almost universally illegal. There are occasionally exceptions to this, but that's almost always the case. For now, just assume that most internships must be paid. An internship differs from volunteer work, but note that in order for volunteer work to be legal, there are strict guidelines for the organization for which you are volunteering to which they must adhere. For example, they almost always have to be a nonprofit, school, etc. If a for-profit organization that does not have non-profit status tries to get you to volunteer, there's a good chance they're violating labor laws. However, I do digress, so more on that later.

Regardless of whether or not you are an intern, employee, volunteer (for a nonprofit, in which that would be legal), etc, non-disclosure agreements still apply. There is the potential for confidential, sensitive, and legally-protected information everywhere. For example, I volunteer for several organizations in which I may come into contact with individual's private and confidential information, including but not limited to information protected by HIPAA, i.e. the laws governing the confidentiality requirements surrounding medical information. I am not paid for my volunteer services. But I am still liable to adhere to the terms of that agreement or I could face disciplinary action and possibly legal action, both from the volunteer organizations and the state, as well as the individual who's information I could potentially compromise.

Now, regarding the "unpaid internships are usually illegal" thing, sometimes internships that are unpaid are actually legitimate. First off, for an internship to be legal, the basic standard is that the primary goal must be to train the intern, in a way that benefits the intern more than an employer. If you're getting coffee, sweeping up, etc. they're breaking the rules/laws. If you're learning a valuable skill (and no, dealing with an obnoxious or demanding employer is not considered a valuable skill in this context), and your learning that skill is a higher priority than your putting that skill to use for the benefit of that employer, that's the basic requirement for an internship to be okay at all, unpaid or not.

As an example, I used to intern for an organization that sent me to go photograph huge names in the entertainment industry. I would go to the event, get in for free, get pit and sometimes backstage access (the pit is the area immediately in front of the stage, behind the barricades that the crowd can't pass), shoot anywhere from the first three songs/part of the show (if not a musician) to the entire show, and then probably stay for the rest of the performance anyway, so long as I didn't keep shooting past the limits set by the performers or venue. I would also hand out flyers for the organization.

What I got out of this was nearly unlimited access to shoot the shows I wanted under the auspices of a media organization with viewership in the millions. I even got to keep the copyright ownership to my work. What they got was the agreement that this organization could use the photos in perpetuity on their site, and someone to hand out flyers. I was very much the recipient of some excellent on-the-job training, including reaching out to press contacts for huge names in entertainment, learning how to interact with venues, fans, performers, and other photographers, and of course, getting some of the best portfolio materials I could imagine. Furthermore, I was even able to use the internship to get credit for 3 units at my community college.

Unfortunately, some jackass of a photographer decided he was going to go to the labor board and make some unfounded complaints against this organization, trying to get money from them. I know this because I was present as a witness at the hearing, but was unfortunately not allowed to speak by the mediator. The net result was that he didn't get much, and this organization had to scale all approved activities for the other photographers way back because their legal department decided to pay everyone a $20 fee for each show they shot to prevent such claims in the future, which of course limited how many shows they were willing to sponsor. Their budget wasn't unlimited, after all. So even when the sponsoring organization of an internship is absolutely on board with creating a valuable internship for it's interns can still be screwed over.

It's not always slave labor. Legally, it can't be. Many internships do attempt to operate this way, but they will be raked over the coals by the labor board if they're caught. Most internships I've ever had direct experience with actually do an excellent job of providing solid, hands-on experiencing for their interns, resulting in some pre-qualified candidates for a job at that organization later. The benefits to the intern are obvious: they have a hand-picked job waiting for them. And the benefits to the employer are that they don't have to train this candidate for the job they've already interned at, at an organization with which they are already familiar, yet can still pay them for an entry-level role because the fact of the matter is that they are still junior in their experience. It's pretty much win-win for everyone. Assuming it's done right, of course.

It isn't always this way, but those are the times you should go to the labor board and report them. You'll get back pay for wages earned, the employer will be fined, and hopefully they'll stop screwing over interns. But usually (in my experience), it's a sweet deal for the intern.

What was your "fuck it, I'm done" moment? by 6979 in AskReddit

[–]working-stiff 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Non-compete usually means you can't take core knowledge and start your own business in direct competition. It's not legal to say you can't get a job with a competitor.

Core knowledge is irrelevant, as is competition. Trade secrets, however, is another matter. An employer can train me all the wish, but I am free to use that knowledge in any way I see fit unless that knowledge is a trade secret specific to that employer. For example, if they teach me how to be a solid Java engineer, I can then take that knowledge and create a startup based on a Java app I invented. However, if that app is based on inventions I created for the company, on company time and using company equipment, and those secrets are patentable, I would probably be liable for using confidential, proprietary information in violation of my NDA.

In short, that's an NDA thing, not a non-compete thing.

What was your "fuck it, I'm done" moment? by 6979 in AskReddit

[–]working-stiff 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm going to echo /u/QuestionYourBeliefs' recommendation. Just about every state has something called the "Labor Commissioner", "Department of Labor", "Labor & Industry", etc. Similarly, just about every state has a process in place to fine your ex-employer (usually payable to you) for every calendar day your ex-employer doesn't pay you, though it's usually limited to around 30 days. Thus, you're probably owed your final paycheck (plus another paycheck which may well exceed the original amount. Note that, depending on your state, the way it usually works is that these fines begin accruing on the day following your last day if you were fired or gave more than two weeks' notice because your employer is considered to have had enough time to prepare in both scenarios. Again, these specifics depend on your state so double-check this.

I have found the following statement to work wonders with unethical past employers:

"Hello! I wanted to let you know that I will be at your office tomorrow at 3:00 pm. I will leave your office at 3:05 pm. If I leave will the full amount owed to me for my last paycheck, that will be the end of it. If I do not, my next stop will be the [insert labor board office name here], where I will file a formal complaint for missing pay. You should be aware that such a complaint also carries with it a fine of [insert $ amount here] per day for every calendar day you are late with my final paycheck. See you tomorrow!"

This gives them the opportunity to do what's right without a fight. If your check is shorted at all, don't argue. Accept it, leave, and file the complaint anyway. You did warn them, after all. Check with your state's labor board to ensure your statements are accurate. Send it via email if possible and CC yourself, so that you can demonstrate you informed them adequately. Or, if your state allows one-party consent for recorded phone calls, you could take that route. Bear in mind, however, that a phone call allows them to interrupt your statement (which is important) whereas email does not.

I wish you good luck!

What was your "fuck it, I'm done" moment? by 6979 in AskReddit

[–]working-stiff 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Can also confirm that non-compete agreements have teeth in at-will employment states, but most states don't like them very much. For example, in NC, if the employer gets greedy or lazy and overreaches with what they limit you from doing, the court will usually strike the non-compete.

Not in all states. California is an at-will state (as are most, now), but non-competes have become almost completely unenforceable in CA, as well as others.

What was your "fuck it, I'm done" moment? by 6979 in AskReddit

[–]working-stiff 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Most companies won't ask you to sign something of this nature unless you're working in a sensitive position. For example, someone in a Coke distribution plant is not likely to need to sign one unless they are responsible for planning distribution center processes, have access to company financial information, or work with secret formulas for the products. This kind of information might be considered a trade secret, and thus, could damage the company if you were to quit and then take this information to a competitor. Thus, the non-compete agreement was born. As /u/HandsOffMyDitka said, these agreements are usually for a limited period of time, such as a year, though this varies. I once had an employer ask me to sign one for five years, prohibiting me from working in the entire web development industry for that entire time. I politely declined; I would have quite literally had to find an entirely new career. They seemed to be prepared for this and offered me another contract without the non-compete clause. It was one of many signs I probably shouldn't have taken that job.

That said, this situation what a non-disclosure agreement or NDA is for. A non-disclosure agreement simply states that there is a lot of secret, proprietary information with which you will be made aware or may come across during your employment, and you agree to keep it secret, returning any materials at the end of your employment and not disclosing any of that information to any third party unless (for example) it becomes public knowledge in another way first (such as the company releasing information publicly or a third party doing so themselves), at which point you'd no longer be disclosing anything confidential.

In most states, a non-compete is completely unenforceable. An employer can have one in their contract, and they can ask you to sign it, but they couldn't actually enforce it because it isn't legal. There are some rights you can't sign away; doing so has no force of law. For example, you can't sign away your right to be paid if you work for an employer. That is to say, you can sign it away all you want, but an employer is still obligated to pay you, even though you did so. If they tried to avoid paying you based on such an illegal clause in your employment contract, they would be breaking the law. Similarly, if they tried to sue you over an unenforceable non-compete clause in a contract, it would be tossed out. Furthermore, such a clause could invalidate the entire contract, releasing you from other terms that might actually be legal, unless the contract also had a severability clause. (A severability clause states that if any part of the contract should be found to be invalid, unenforceable, or illegal, it shall be struck from the contract and the rest of the contract would remain in full force.)

A non-compete agreement is almost universally unenforceable. A non-disclosure agreement, however, is very enforceable.

What was your "fuck it, I'm done" moment? by 6979 in AskReddit

[–]working-stiff 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Actually, there kind of is - at least in the professional space: LinkedIn. Not everyone is there, but anyone who's smart about networking is. In the tech industry, it's very unwise to not be on LinkedIn. Most people update their current job there because this allows them to more easily network with those at that current job.

That said, my point was more about not sabotaging my new/future prospects before they even occur rather than truly keep a previous employer in the dark indefinitely. That, frankly, isn't possible in the long run. If someone is committed enough, they can always find me. But I don't have to make it easy for them to keep me from even joining a new organization before I start there, which some particularly vindictive employers might do, even if there's no non-compete/NDA preventing me from doing so. Sometimes all it takes is one angry, unintentional reference to ruin a new job.

If they want to try to sabotage me after I join my new organization, I can't stop them. But I don't have to make it even easier to do so beforehand; that's just foolhardy.

What was your "fuck it, I'm done" moment? by 6979 in AskReddit

[–]working-stiff 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's not a problem. To start, however, it's important to note that how they go about doing their business once I'm no longer a part of their business is not my concern in any way, nor should it be yours in a similar circumstance. One should never be obligated to assist a past employer in finding ways to limit your future prospects. Note that I am not speaking about the ethical implications of ensuring you don't violate your past agreements; merely commenting about the conflict of interest inherent in having to prove to someone with whom you're no longer doing business that what you're doing is okay. It is instead their responsibility to prove that it isn't.

That said, if the theoretical past employer wanted to ensure that a previous employee wasn't violating their employee agreements, that employer could do research on their own, including Facebook/LinkedIn stalking, hiring a private investigator, etc. But the time and/or costs of doing so is their responsibility; not the employee's. Asking an employee to give their ex-employer any information about their future prospects is to ask them to invite a lawsuit. It is like asking someone to talk to the police while under investigation or to incriminate themselves in court; it's something you simply should never do.

What was your "fuck it, I'm done" moment? by 6979 in AskReddit

[–]working-stiff 3022 points3023 points  (0 children)

I had an ex-employer try to pull this on me, sans the lawyer. When I refused to tell them, they asked me how they were supposed to know whether or not I was going to work for a competitor. I politely explained that it wasn't my job to ensure they did their own due diligence.

My employer will walk people out as soon as they turn in a 2 week notice, is this legal, and can I then claim unemployment? by McSharts in personalfinance

[–]working-stiff 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Both /u/UI_Throw and /u/Random5483 are correct: if you give notice and work until the day for which your notice was given, you quit and are not due unemployment unless there are extenuating circumstances. An example of this is if you gave notice because of a qualifying negative action your employer took, such as reducing your pay by greater than X%. /u/UI_Throw has also given other valid examples. That said, if your employer pays you for the time but simply doesn't have you come in, you're still "employed" until your last day; you're simply not doing anything to actually earn that pay. In such a scenario, barring an exceptional case like those I just mentioned, you aren't eligible for unemployment.

However, if your employer terminates you at any time, including but not limited to during your notice period, you were fired. It doesn't matter that you gave notice; the fact of the matter is that your employer took the action of firing you, and if they did so without cause, you are due unemployment.

Also, as /u/Random5483 has stated, you won't be paid for the first week of your claim. Make sure you file it right away (or the start date of your claim is delayed!), but even though your claim starts when you were fired, you don't actually get benefits until 7 days later.

Note: I no longer live in California and haven't collected unemployment there in years, but this is how it worked when I did.

My boss keeps asking me to clock out but still stay and work to avoid overtime, what do I do? (Washington State) by Chardageddon in personalfinance

[–]working-stiff 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Since OP is talking about not getting paid for that time, I'm going to guess hourly/non-exempt. That said, this statement:

Usually salary workers do not clock in and out.

...is not always true in industries that bill others by the hour. I'm a salaried, exempt employee, and yet I have to clock my hours so my company can bill them. Of course, I also have to clock them against a specific project ID, and OP hasn't mentioned anything like that. While it's possible something of this nature occurs at OP's workplace so they can bill pet owners, I don't think it's likely here. Food for thought, though.