Live data from Hacker News

Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

bloomberg.com

131–140 of 218 posts

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#131

Non-competes are heavily restricted in the UK under the basic principles of free competition, anti-slavery and anti-trust. No noncompete clause can go further than is reasonably necessary to protect a legitimate business interest, otherwise it is unenforceable. The burden of proof is on the employer. No individual can be prevented from plying their trade by contract with another. I'm amazed in the land of the free th…

Maybe. Pretty much every company I've worked for has had a vaguely worded non-compete clause in their contracts. Usually you can't work for another company that does the same thing (i.e. a direct competitor) for a year.

None of them ever enforced them to my knowledge. Even ex-Dyson employees going to Shark. But the fact that they are allowed at all (and they are) is often enough to generate fear and doubt.

Some people leaving Dyson refused to name their new employees just to be safe.

They should be banned entirely.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#132
In my first job (junior developer in end of nineties) I had NDA that prevented me to work on software industry for 2 years if I leave the company. I left to competitor but I was worried if they sue me. They never did, so then I learned it is just a scaring tactic's. Also, a lawyer told me later that not only it is illegal they also would need to fully compensate the period I am in quarantine.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#133
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can still work in a company not directly competing with your previous employer and get the compensation. I just had a quick look (I never had one), non-competes without compensation are illegal in France.

I'm not a lawyer but I don't think you can do that, no

Yes you can. I'm serving a 1 year non-compete and my former employer encourages getting non finance work because they hope you never go back to the industry

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#135

I've always refused to sign any contract with a non-compete. In every case, the employer has removed or voided it. The only exceptions were jobs in Chicago, and I walked away from two different jobs because they couldn't change their contract. I often don't even bring it up during the interview, until I get an offer. At that point if they're not willing to negotiate my basic rights as a worker, it's not a company I w…

> I'm glad I've wasted their time That's an odd attitude. You've also wasted your own time, yes? I can see how it's problematic to bring it up ahead of time. "By the way, I won't sign a non-compete." Immediately the company is on alert: you plan to quit after learning their secrets and go to a competitor? It's like drug testing: obviously a violation of your rights, but why would I hire this one guy who refuses to ta…

> That's an odd attitude. You've also wasted your own time, yes?

Dodging a bullet is not wasting time. In fact, not signing a noncompete implies that the employee will not be forced to wait out an unspecified period before he is authorized to accept a job offer. Thus, refusing to sign a noncompete not only saves time but also improves their chances to have access to better job opportunities.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#136

I've always refused to sign any contract with a non-compete. In every case, the employer has removed or voided it. The only exceptions were jobs in Chicago, and I walked away from two different jobs because they couldn't change their contract. I often don't even bring it up during the interview, until I get an offer. At that point if they're not willing to negotiate my basic rights as a worker, it's not a company I w…

> I'm glad I've wasted their time That's an odd attitude. You've also wasted your own time, yes? I can see how it's problematic to bring it up ahead of time. "By the way, I won't sign a non-compete." Immediately the company is on alert: you plan to quit after learning their secrets and go to a competitor? It's like drug testing: obviously a violation of your rights, but why would I hire this one guy who refuses to ta…

> but why would I hire this one guy who refuses to take it?

Am I the only one who finds this asymmetry bizarre? Shell I ask the hiring manger to take a drug test? And why would I work for him if he refuses?

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#137

Non competes shouldn't last longer than your job. I once had to sign a year long non compete for a three month internship. Noncompetes should be void if you are fired. They should also only apply to salaried employees, or employees at a certain wage level. It is disgusting that minimum wage employees have to sign noncompetes

> They should also only apply to salaried employees, or employees at a certain wage level.

Why? I don't think they should apply to anyone.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#138
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is the average person doesn't have the money to pay a lawyer to fight off a company - especially the ones with teams of lawyers who need something to do.

No it's much worse than this. They never threaten the employee. They threaten the company hiring the individual. The employee might take it to court(and it most states win), but the hiring firm has no incentive to do so, and just moves on the next candidate. They don't have to sue, they just have to send a letter to the new firm. Or even worse the new firm just has to ask "did you sign a non-compete?"

Huh. But the hiring firm didn’t sign the non-compete, so how does the first company go after the second?

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#140
Are non-competes enforceable across country borders? Example: I get hired by Google in Switzerland, quit, then go to work for Amazon in Canada. Is the non-compete I signed in Switzerland enforceable in Canada? What about across USACanada? Or across EU member states?
Post reply on HN