<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000'><br>----- "Eric Tucker" <eric@semperex.com> wrote:
<br>> <style>p { margin: 0; }</style><div style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">> ----- "Sami Khan" <sami@etopian.net> wrote:
<br>> > From: "Sami Khan" <sami@etopian.net><br><br>> > <br>> > 2) Businesses have the ability to fire on demand, especially<br>> > contractors. Businesses also get to make all the decisions and so on. I<br>> > agree with the general reasonable part, but I think that there are often<br>> > too many things out of the control of the contractor. Therefore, I do<br>> > believe in sound contracts, businesses are always open to renegotiate<br>> > them if they don't like certain terms, but I will start off with a<br>> > decent agreement that holds me liable for nothing. <br>> <br>> Don't get me wrong, so do I. We're not really on that different of pages at all. I just see a singular reliance on the contract as limiting. I tend to be of the opinion that if I can demonstrate why something is reasonable then it actually will get questioned less (and perhaps justifiably so). Thinking back to the olden days when I read the book, "Getting Past No" about being on the same side of the table. :-) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getting_Past_NO)<br>> <br><br>Clarifying: I start a bit closer to the middle. But yeah, otherwise ... it's gotta be sound, and it's gotta have some ability to flex ... with boundaries.<br><br>Also to be clear, I know the contract is not the only thing we're all considering. Didn't mean to suggest that ... I'm just trying to make sure the big picture is in play.<br></div></div></body></html>