# Store Requiring Employees to Shop There **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 30, 2009, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/store-requiring-employees-to-shop-there/515748 "2009-10-30T17:33:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2009, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/store-requiring-employees-to-shop-there/515748/61 "2009-11-06T01:50:47Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > Generally you get an an employee discount which encourages you to shop there. The big 3 have special plans that allow an employee to get better prices on cars for example.Then it is un-needed to be draconian. When my brother worked at the Jeep (AMC?) plant in South Bend he said the discount wasn’t worth it. He drove, among other things, a [Pacer](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMC_Pacer). 😃 He also had a Studebaker Golden Hawk (a really fast sleeper}. An [Isetta](http://www.whirlingpool.com/isetta/history/history.htm). A [Powell pickup](http://www.olskoolrodz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=32370). (Scroll down one message) A Checker (not the taxi). Wierd dude, my brother Charlie. 😛 No discounts, he bought them all used. The Stude, I must admit, was kickass. ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2009, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/store-requiring-employees-to-shop-there/515748/62 "2009-11-06T01:53:05Z")
> [@sweetie pea](#): > > Come on, I can’t be the only one who wondered what the bounty was… Brown stuff on the end of one’s nose.:rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2009, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/store-requiring-employees-to-shop-there/515748/63 "2009-11-06T01:53:06Z")
> [@qazwart](#): > > A contract requires both sides to benefit… Is this true, always? ---
**Author:** ![Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimmy_Gibbler)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2009, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/store-requiring-employees-to-shop-there/515748/64 "2009-11-06T01:57:25Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > Is this true, always? In a general sense, yes. Consideration is the concept that something of value must pass between the parties; that each party needs to give up one thing or commit to do some thing in exchange for another thing or another promise that has some value or benefit to them. Courts will not inquire whether the parties’ own personal systems of valuation make much sense (the old maxim that “a peppercorn will suffice” as consideration), but they will look to see that a bargain, a tit-for-tat, has been struck between the contracting parties. Of course, even when that fails, some courts will occasionally use the doctrine of promissory estoppel to give a party the value of its expectations in a one-sided agreement, but this is far from universal. ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2009, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/store-requiring-employees-to-shop-there/515748/65 "2009-11-06T01:57:52Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > Is this true, always? According to Judge Judy it is. Not that she follows that doctrine on her stupid show. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/store-requiring-employees-to-shop-there/515748.md?page=3)