Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO)

CSCO 84.82

+3.0%

Feb 6 9:30 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: M. Charles Swope who wrote (52208)	4/29/2001 11:43:46 PM
From: Robert O	of 77400

M. Swope: thank you for taking the time to cite cases and vindicate both prongs of my initial position. Your point that 'The difference seems to depend on the definiteness of the terms. E.g., for a contract to be created the duration of the employment must be definite; the contract must be for say, three years not just left open' is well taken and that is precisely why employers rarely use definitive time frames for offers. In fact, I would dare say the ONLY time employers in effect guarantee a definite term of employment is in a bona fide employment contract viz. the intention of both parties is clearly to enter into a contract for employment with time period terms, rate of pay terms, perhaps non compete terms, etc. Now, in the sprit of cooperation with you both I also agree that BUSINESS decisions should be based on business reasons not always simply on what can or cannot be done based on current case law and propensity for losing a suit. Therefore, if based on a cost benefit analysis Cisco’s course of action seems prudent, by all means I join you in applause. Thanks again for your efforts, M. G'day. RO

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next