[avira_tk]

The second part of the ethical operation is to get those freshers passed off as experienced workers. Someone commented about there being no grey area in ethics, my advice is to go easy on yourself with regards to believing whatever you read in the business press. Paul Getty famously said " the meek shall inherit the earth, but not it's mineral rights", big money is a combination of state backing and exploitation, just have to look at how the business operates to see which one is being used.

Originally Posted by Gansan

If an organization employs someone and says he should not hold any other employment anywhere else while he remains an employee, it is perfectly valid. It is not exploitative. The employee is free to walk away if he disagrees. He can take the company to court about the clause and see what the verdict is. The agreement will be read in it's entirety, not just this clause, and if the court decides there is no natural justice in the agreement, it will throw the agreement out.

I didn't work in the IT sector yet my appointment order had such a clause. The clause was "I will not hold any other employment or indulge in any business activities". The second part will generally be winked at, unless the employee crossed some laxman rekha. At that time there was no gig economy.

That's not how the law operates in the real world. Our ethical hero who is there by virtue of being his father's son, is laying off those with experience after the firm recruited thousands of freshers. A good number haven't received joining letters, ethics man's company however won't let you shop around for offers in campus recruitment once they make their(non existent) offer. Those recruits will always have to explain that gap in employment.

[Raghu M]

Wonder how people come up with such jargons. Can't they just call it dual employment? The word moonlighting doesn't even ring a bell for someone who hears it for the first time. Coming to the topic, it's plainly against ethics. You are cheating someone of a contract, it's illegal.

[JoshMachine]

The inflection point of the matter is when you work for competition, once your primary job is over for the day.
Call it moonlighting or overemployment or any other term, but this scenario is not acceptable to anyone.

What should be acceptable or allowed rather, is when you work for Wipro in the day-time and go work for Swiggy after office hours. Non-competitive.

[hondatoyotafan]

A lot of companies allow moonlighting like in my organization you can take permission from corporate HR and BU head and can do freelance work outside the company and it is approved as long as you do not compete with the primary business of the company.

One of our colleagues has built a successful cloud consulting company in his side time while still working for the company. He does justice to both the organizations as he is a workaholic.

On another hand we had a former colleague who has a successful product development startup but still comes to the job. He mostly gets fired at the companies he works as he concentrates more on his startup.He is so good technically that he usually lands another job in 1 or 2 months. When asked he says that the job is 'free money' and will think about quitting once his startup becomes consistent. I think the 'free money' attitude is what the organizations despise.

[shankar.balan]

‘Moonlighting’. The description and usage came about in the old days when one had a ‘day job’ and evening/ night time was generally meant to be ‘rest time’.

People who were hard-pressed financially or who had tough committments to meet, were at times, forced to ‘moonlight’ after their normal working hours, at a second or even third job, to make ends meet. Hence, this usage.

Originally Posted by Raghu M

Wonder how people come up with such jargons. Can't they just call it dual employment? The word moonlighting doesn't even ring a bell for someone who hears it for the first time. Coming to the topic, it's plainly against ethics. You are cheating someone of a contract, it's illegal.

[whitewing]

Originally Posted by JoshMachine

...
What should be acceptable or allowed rather, is when you work for Wipro in the day-time and go work for Swiggy after office hours. Non-competitive.

Unless the client for your work for in Wipro is, say Zomato and you are working on a nifty feature(say better recommendation engine), that could as well be deployed in Swiggy app.

The point I'm trying to make is - the decision to moonlight should be based out of a healthy conversation between the employee & employer. But, may be that is expecting too much maturity on behalf of both the parties.

[fiat_tarun]

I am against multiple jobs in technology. You cannot be working on new development with one organisation and then going to a competitor (which will most likely be the case considering the skills you have) and doing similar work.

You are going to deploy knowledge across both jobs which could be the competitive edge a company has.

[McLaren Rulez]

Originally Posted by Mohitkumaar

Personally I think taking up two regular jobs is unethical but my reason is completely opposite. You are taking up an opportunity for some other person who may not even have one job.

That's not how the world works though. There isn't a fixed number of jobs, 1 per person. Contractual issues aside, if you do something useful in your spare time and people are willing to pay you for it, that's a net benefit to the world.

Wipro can legally enforce this, fire those who are doing it etc. but the thinking is old fashioned. You can tell by the words they use

the offer letters that say "no double lives", "no two timing" and "no moonlighting".

They need to ask themselves why their employees do that. Is it the pay or is it the mind-numbing work they make them do?

[tsk1979]

I wonder if Wipro is planning to fire their board of directors who are on boards of multipe companies.

And also fire anybody found to own shares of a competitor, since investing in a direct competitor instead of Wipro is going to be a problem according to the "ethics" standards they tout.

[Lalvaz]

Im totally in favour of moonlighting. Heck, in my experience, its those folks who moonlight that have the drive and intelligence to go above and beyond. They want more from life than a boring 9-5 job, and are willing to go that extra mile to make it happen, rather than cribbing why they can't make it big.

Even if companies like Wipro are against it now, it won't be long before they jump on this bandwagon, cos you cant stop an idea whose time has come.

[dragracer567]

At the end of the day, it all depends on what you sign up for IMHO. If your contract doesn't specifically target moonlighting, then it shouldn't legally be a problem as long as you don't break any confidentiality clauses or NDAs. Most companies however do have such clauses and some even prevent employees from joining their competitors after resignation! One should keep in mind that even if legal on paper, this is a breach of trust - especially if the second employer is a competitor! It also gets morally complicated when you spend the same 8 hours working for 2 employers (as possible with WFH) since both are paying for your exclusive attention. I get the counter-arguments too though, a lot of companies in India don't go through with their contractual/moral oligations as well, it's a two-way street.

I do think there is a nuance here though. If a white-collar worker decides to work in McDonalds or drive an Uber during his off-hours, that should certainly be allowed - it's not affecting the original employer in any way!

[am1m]

While working at a company in the late-2000s, we had desktops and network cables and of course there was no concept or chance of remote work or WFH. Had a colleague whose dad was a 'wealthy businessman' and who was clearly marking time till he could join one of his dad's businesses. Perhaps the family thought a stint with a brand-name IT company would help add some respectability to his professional and matrimonial resume.

One of the family businesses was sand...to be blunt- illegal river sand mining. A group of us spent an entertaining afternoon listening to this enterprising chap on the desk phone guiding his sand lorries using google maps (relatively new, at least to us) to plot a course for the lorry drivers to avoid the main roads and inspections/sand mining crackdowns!

Obviously this is a one-off case, but just sharing this anecdote to add some humor and also to highlight that moonlighting in IT is not a new concept and certainly not a flaw of the remote working model. There will always be people who try and take advantage of the system. Doesn't mean you scrap the system or assume the majority of people are like that. Policies need to be tuned, tightened and enforced. Perhaps changed to adapt to these ways of working. (Before someone jumps on me- I don't mean changed to enable illegal sand mining! )

As someone who has followed all his employment contracts 'to the T', even a couple of times to his detriment- I once lost a great job opportunity because I served the unreasonable 2 month notice period at the previous company, and I also moved to another city for a job because I had signed on with that company first before a better job in my preferred home city came through- I for one am happy these conversations are happening and conventions are being challenged by a generation that is not scared like me and does not think employment is a great favor being bestowed on to us.

Eventually there will be a middle-ground or several middle-grounds that will develop to keep business running and it will be more of a business, professional relationship- which is the way it should be.

[binand]

Originally Posted by fiat_tarun

You are going to deploy knowledge across both jobs which could be the competitive edge a company has.

Any company that lists its "employee knowledge" as a competitive edge is already heading towards disaster. These employees holding knowledge can resign, die unexpectedly, or simply be poached - and where does that leave your competitive edge? Every CEO will see this; if not their advisors - VCs or management consultants or board members - have a duty to tell them.

Originally Posted by dragracer567

Most companies however do have such clauses and some even prevent employees from joining their competitors after resignation!

These non-compete clauses are illegal too. Companies get away with this sort of stuff because nobody questions them.

But this does bring to the fore such practices of companies - and their foolhardy expectation that employees must trust them to do the right thing as opposed to the most profitable thing.

[shankar.balan]

Originally Posted by am1m

to highlight that moonlighting in IT is not a new concept and certainly not a flaw of the remote working model. There will always be people who try and take advantage of the system. Doesn't mean you scrap the system or assume the majority of people are like that.

As someone who has followed all his employment contracts 'to the T', even a couple of times to his detriment-
happy these conversations are happening and conventions are being challenged by a generation that is not scared like me and does not think employment is a great favor being bestowed on to us.

more of a business, professional relationship- which is the way it should be.

Very Well Said!
My parents generation usually worked in the Forces, Govt, Public and Blue Chip Pvt Sector Companies and usually stayed with the same company throughout their working lives. In those days, working for a big ‘Sterling/ Blue Chip’ meant that one was set for life. Salary may not have been big but lifestyle, perks and benefits were fantastic, often lasting right through retirement. The ‘emotional connect’ and ‘loyalty quotient’ was very high in those days.

My generation entered the workforce just around liberalisation. Life changed incredibly. The IT revolution and knowledge based economy fuelled this much further.

It has now largely become an accepted fact that working for a company is a simple business transaction/ commercial arrangement which suits both parties. The employee simply lends his/ her knowledge, time, expertise and intelligence in return for a financial consideration. The ‘emotional’ piece is either non existent or very low key and low priority. ‘Loyalty quotient’ is definitely much lower than before.

The new generation isn't very motivated by ‘permanence and possession’. They are much more like ‘dilettante butterflies’ sipping nectar from mutliple flowers - the true proponents of ‘on demand consumption’. This holds true in many spheres of their lives, be they employment, housing and accommodation, personal transport or even music and books and entertainment.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by dragracer567

If a white-collar worker decides to work in McDonalds or drive an Uber during his off-hours, that should certainly be allowed - it's not affecting the original employer in any way!

What if this white collar McDonalds worker decides to flip burgers at Burger King at night? Technically it is working for the competitor, even though the work is very different. So, you have to consider case by case basis if one is really giving away confidential information by working with the competition.

Originally Posted by fiat_tarun

You cannot be working on new development with one organisation and then going to a competitor (which will most likely be the case considering the skills you have) and doing similar work.

No, what you cite is very rare. That is like a programmer in Swiggy working as Zomato programmer at night. Even the dumbest programmer will know that is not a right thing to do, and that it is unethical. What usually happens is they will use the same skills in unrelated industries. If you are an android developer, you could be developing food delivery app during day and banking app during night. How is that working for competition?

I have worked with many moonlighters (not overemployed) over decades who spent few hours a week solving highly challenging design problems for us, while doing very boring stuff in their day job like maintenance.

What Wipro/Infy is saying is not honest. Because they are so huge, they are in every industry. So, if an employee moonlights for any industry, they claim the employee works for competition. But the employee is doing insurance software maintenance doing day, him working for banking industry at night shouldn't be considered working for competitor, just because Wipro/Infy also has a division for banking.