Non compete clauses

[FlowWithTheGo23]

Anyone have any experience with these? I'm looking at a new job, but it's not in the same field. Would my non compete clause have any bearing on something like that? I have the paperwork around here somewhere, but was just wondering.

 

[MASShole]

Generally if you're not going to a competing company in the same field you will be ok.

 

[Sasquatch Smith]

Unless you're...COMPETING with your current company, it's not an issue. They only exist to ensure that certain folks don't ditch and sell the same product (or whatever) in the same market for a direct competitor, where you would have a chance to take all your customers and company knowledge to the competition.

 

[Kevin Rudd]

they don't prevent you from getting another job but rather from a similar job with a competitor for a specified period of time.

Have I ever seen one actually enforced? Never, companies usually don't give a shit unless you are stealing clients.

 

[SevenSamurai]

Lots and lots. What state are you in?

For a regular position in a company, Non-complete clauses are almost legally worthless and unenforceable in right-to-work states (if you want to fight them) however that isn't their true purpose -while they cannot prevent someone from seeking work and a livelihood in those states -they will require that person a bunch of legal headaches and expenses to do so -which creates a nice annoying deterrent for someone hastily jumping ship.

For executive positions and positions of extreme strategic importance the ink is usually stronger and can be enforced in right-to-work states because just compensation is in the contract and thus you are not preventing someone from putting basic food on their table.

I have a clause in mine which basically says in the event I am fired or such -they will continue to pay me for one year in exchange for not working for a competitor for a period of one year. They can also continue to pay me an agreed sum past this period (for up to 3 years) I believe) to prevent me from going to a competitor if they choose. This is to prevent me from raiding the ranks of the company, moving clients to my new company, and using information to benefit another company that we all know happens that can't be proven. As I hold most of the close and detailed relationships at my company, an owner would likely do this until they could secure transition of the relationships to a replacement that could hold on to the account. -In my case this would never actually happen -the owner and I are like best friends and he is going to retire in 2 years a wealthy man in his mid 40s largely because of my hard work -he would never fire me.

 

[Josh]

They're essentially unenforceable and worthless. There are other ways to protect proprietary knowledge or practices, I'm not sure why companies still use the non-compete thing. I guess they're a psychological deterrent for people who don't know they are meaningless.

 

[demoness]

they don't prevent you from getting another job but rather from a similar job with a competitor for a specified period of time.

Have I ever seen one actually enforced? Never, companies usually don't give a shit unless you are stealing clients.

This is true.

I had 3 years when I left my previous position. I guess they do it to protect themselves/their clients.

 

[GoatGoat]

Lots and lots. What state are you in?

For a regular position in a company, Non-complete clauses are almost legally worthless and unenforceable in right-to-work states (if you want to fight them) however that isn't their true purpose -while they cannot prevent someone from seeking work and a livelihood in those states -they will require that person a bunch of legal headaches and expenses to do so -which creates a nice annoying deterrent for someone hastily jumping ship.

For executive positions and positions of extreme strategic importance the ink is usually stronger and can be enforced in right-to-work states because just compensation is in the contract and thus you are not preventing someone from putting basic food on their table.

I have a clause in mine which basically says in the event I am fired or such -they will continue to pay me for one year in exchange for not working for a competitor for a period of one year. They can also continue to pay me an agreed sum past this period (for up to 3 years) I believe) to prevent me from going to a competitor if they choose.

I wonder how many people read this and say to themselves: "Damn, I would get my ass fired the next day!"

 

[SevenSamurai]

They're essentially unenforceable and worthless. There are other ways to protect proprietary knowledge or practices, I'm not sure why companies still use the non-compete thing. I guess they're a psychological deterrent for people who don't know they are meaningless.

This a better summary than my long winded one.

However they are enforceable at the strategic and executive level where compensation packages are involved.

For regular employees, they are just a psychological deterrent like you said -plus cause some legal formalities which would slow a hasty ship jumping.

 

[Josh]

This a better summary than my long winded one.

However they are enforceable at the strategic and executive level where compensation packages are involved.

For regular employees, they are just a psychological deterrent like you said -plus cause some legal formalities which would slow a hasty ship jumping.

Logan/Denali June 2014

 

[odog]

This might be a little different but years ago I knew a guy who started a retail outlet which offered something new and different but nothing that couldn't be easily copied. He was making lots of cash and several of his friends started franchises using the same name. He obviously would get a percentage of what they made. Eventually a couple of his friends got annoyed they were giving him money for their stores so they started their own under a different name and took most of their customers.

I think he planned on suing them because they had no-compete clauses but I think he gave it up. It would have cost too much money to pursue the matter.

 

[FlowWithTheGo23]

Thanks everyone. I assumed there wouldn't be an issue but was just wondering.

 

[SevenSamurai]

Logan/Denali June 2014

Are you doing it this year back to back? awesome. I will likely be in Brazil for the World Cup then (I'm working there)

What about Ice Waterfall climbing? Im in Alaska again next month -not sure if it's cold enough yet -but if so I'm going to Valdez to at least watch it if I can!

 

[SevenSamurai]

Thanks everyone. I assumed there wouldn't be an issue but was just wondering.

You don't have anything to worry about.

but it's always go to read the fine print so you don't get yourself wrapped up in legal BS -because a company with staff legal representation can bury an individual in legal expense to fight something just for shits and giggles because they know individuals cannot hang on for long..

 

[Josh]

Are you doing it this year back to back? awesome. I will likely be in Brazil for the World Cup then (I'm working there)

What about Ice Waterfall climbing? Im in Alaska again next month -not sure if it's cold enough yet -but if so I'm going to Valdez to at least watch it if I can!

Yeah, that's the plan.

November in Alaska, I have no idea if ice is in or not. If you ever need a pro guide, let me know. A close buddy of mine is an IFMGA certified Mountain Guide with first ascents in Patagonia, Trango Towers in Pakistan, Julian Alps in Europe, and many others. He's based out of Vancouver, and he also has a lot of rope-access construction experience.

 

[SevenSamurai]

Yeah, that's the plan.

November in Alaska, I have no idea if ice is in or not. If you ever need a pro guide, let me know. A close buddy of mine is an IFMGA certified Mountain Guide with first ascents in Patagonia, Trango Towers in Pakistan, Julian Alps in Europe, and many others. He's based out of Vancouver, and he also has a lot of rope-access construction experience.

definitely, Likely need a guides for lots of stuff.

I'm trying to take a bunch of co-workers/clients to climb Rainer next year for some fun for example.

 

[FlowWithTheGo23]

You don't have anything to worry about.

but it's always go to read the fine print so you don't get yourself wrapped up in legal BS -because a company with staff legal representation can bury an individual in legal expense to fight something just for shits and giggles because they know individuals cannot hang on for long..

No luck finding it tonight. I'll look again tomorrow.

 

[Omaplata]

Anyone have any experience with these? I'm looking at a new job, but it's not in the same field. Would my non compete clause have any bearing on something like that? I have the paperwork around here somewhere, but was just wondering.

Depends on the state. I live in MN, non-competes are supposed to be honored legally speaking, but they never are. You'd have to be taking clients with you that you did not negotiate stay with you, in order for legal action to occur.

Also, don't tell them where you are going, none of their business.

 

[FlowWithTheGo23]

I'm a low level scrub. It's not like I'm a VP or something. My boss is such a massive asshole though. It still surprises me sometimes.

 

[Josh]

definitely, Likely need a guides for lots of stuff.

I'm trying to take a bunch of co-workers/clients to climb Rainer next year for some fun for example.

Rainier is under the same rules as Denali, I think. They have a very short list of approved guiding outfits that are allowed to guide there. I've heard stories of people getting the boot for un-official guiding on those mountains.

Let me know if you want to do anything a little more off the beaten path.