Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 218 posts

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#171

Post by Gibbon1 »

geezerjay wrote: post #135
sgustard wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Was going to say the time wasted interviewing pales in comparison to the time wasted if the non-compete becomes an issue legally.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#172

Post by Gibbon1 »

jib wrote: post #74
Legogris wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> something silly 1-3 months mutual notice period is common practice in many countries. In France 3 months is standard.

My French contract had 2 months notice and a non compete option for the employer, where they had the option to pay me 75% of the salary for 2 years to enforce the non compete. That kind of non competes I don’t mind.

Yeah I ain't agreeing to take a 2 year hole in my employment.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#173

Post by _m96l »

ChrisLomont wrote: post #152
_m96l wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While this may all be true, the upshot is that as individual employees, we have zero leverage or bargaining power against these large employers. Even now, with the great shortage of tech talent - while is repeatedly used as a justification to import an unlimited number of foreign workers - these very same large employers who complain about this shortage, do not hesitate to reject a qualified candidate who will not si…

> we have zero leverage or bargaining power against these large employers. You have the leverage not to work there. They have the leverage not to hire you. If enough people choose to work there despite things they don’t like, your leverage is not lost because of the company being large, it’s lost because people choose to work there despite things you don’t like. Companies compete for employees.

Have you read the article?

In many areas where non-competes are legal, all employers slap them on their contracts.

So your choice is to sign one, or remain unemployed.

Also, most employees aren't fully aware of what these non-competes mean anyway.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#174

Post by Gibbon1 »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #21
77pt77 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> since 1872 I knew California had banned them but I though it had happened a few decades ago at most.

California uses the XKCD cooking[1] method of banning things. Sometimes they get it right. [1] https://xkcd.com/720/

California doesn't ban that much, for instance while I can't buy a 100 round drum magazine, I can buy liquor at the grocery store on a Sunday.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#175

Post by Gibbon1 »

Lramseyer wrote: post #85

Serious question - How do the previous employers find out when an employee breaches a non-compete agreement? Is it usually word of mouth that makes it's way to HR/legal? or is it registered through someone's SSN? Because I know LinkedIn does a pretty good job at hiding from your current employer that you're looking for a job. What's to stop them from hiding your current employer to your previous employer?

I think usually because the employee opens his fat mouth is why.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#176

Post by Gibbon1 »

twblalock wrote: post #7
harry8 wrote: post #6

noncompetes work even when illegal and unenforceable. Why, because you or many of your potential employers don't want the massive cost and emotional toll of being sued - even if you win you lose. That's all google, facebook, microsoft, etc. you know the companies that we KNOW are guilty of operating a cartel to drive down wages. That's all they need. This baseless illegal, legally unenforcable contract provision mean…

> Cue the apologists working for the big silicon valley players... Why? Silicon Valley is in California where noncompetes are illegal. Silicon Valley companies don't use them. I've been in Silicon Valley my entire career and I have never seen one or heard of anyone who has.

And those SV companies also were caught having a no poaching agreements between each other. If those guys could enforce non-competes in California they would do so reflexively.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#177

Post by microDude »

Buttons840 wrote: post #163
microDude wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I lived in Oregon when I signed a non-compete as a software engineer intern. I did not know what I was signing and thought it just applied to stealing trade secrets or source code. So, I ended up working for that company after grad school, for about 6 years. Then,,, a customer of that company (one that I worked with, and grew a favorable reputation with) offered me a nice package (2x salary offering, plus a RSU bonus…

You had to hire a lawyer to get out of signing the additional agreement? Why did you sign the additional agreement?

Yes. My old boss was threatening to take me to court. I could not afford the fees, but I wanted a lawyer to review any paperwork that I was being forced to sign.

After my last day I hired a lawyer to review the document. He was able to strike the part about me knowingly taking IP with me. He then advised me to sign the document, since court costs would be much more expensive.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#178

Post by tracker1 »

I generally read the verbiage... especially regarding non-competes and IP assignment. If it only regards poaching and work done for the employer, I'll sign.. if it includes work I do on my own, or working for a competitor for an unreasonable time-frame, I decline or strike out the offending lines.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#179

Post by ngngngng »

matz1 wrote: post #122
ngngngng wrote: post #95

Do non competes ever come back to bite you? I signed a non compete at a previous company, and several of coworkers left to a direct competitor. No one cares, no one ever heard anything about it. My current company tried to get me to sign a non compete by leaving it on my desk. I dropped it in a drawer and now everyone's forgot about it. No one is ever going to remember to get me to sign it. The main thing that weirde…

Me personally would just sign it and forget about it. It won't stop me to work at competitor. I deemed that the chance it will come back to bite me is very very low, I'll accept risk.

That seems like an ok solution, but I much prefer mine of just never sign it and trust that no one will realize I never signed it. Best to not put up a fuss but also provide an airtight defense should they ever come after me.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#180

Post by useranme »

_m96l wrote: post #42
tranchms wrote: post #2

I’ve found these non-competes often have no teeth. Unless you possess exceptional knowledge or secrets, companies will not waste the resources going after you. And often when they do, they lose. But it’s a judgement call. I’d say the fear of non-competes has more power than the non-competes themselves.

> I’ve found these non-competes often have no teeth. Unless you possess exceptional knowledge or secrets, companies will not waste the resources going after you. You naively conflate "not biting" with "having no teeth". Amazon forces all workers to sign non-competes. They only sue those who piss them off. Granted, a small minority. But that minority suffers a harrowing ordeal, typically losing their new job and their…

Good to know. I'll never work for Amazon no matter what the pay is.
Post reply on HN