Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roachboy
the clauses in the written contract that seaver bit above are the conditions of possibility for recruiters saying whatever they think will work to get someone to sign. it is the explicit erasure of any verbal agreements.
given that these erasure clauses are in the contract that you would sign in order to hand control over your life away for x years in exchange for whatever motivates you in terms of rewards/benefits, the question of recruiter tactics becomes a purely ethical matter.
|
I guess that makes sense, but is it really possible to erase any liable responsibility from a verbal contract by simply signing another contract that says, "Yeah, what we said before doesn't count"? It's baffling that there is purposeful wording to allow the recruiter's lies in the contract. Not only is that turning a blind eye, but it seems to almost support the poor behavior.
Ethically, it's simple. Recruiters are soldiers, right? And (ethical, not legal) conduct becoming of an officer (*gasp*, I called them all officers again!) includes not misrepresenting the future of potential fellow soldiers. The problem is that most people are only as ethical as they have to be. Without a system in place to monitor and penalize, many recruiters will go on doing what they've been doing.