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

181–190 of 218 posts

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#181

Post by amerberg »

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…

One came back to bite me: https://progressive.org/magazine/ties-that-bind/

They had a joke of a case. When they first threatened to sue after I'd given notice, the CEO told me he'd have to take legal action to set an example for the new company. Or as the head of HR put it "they can't take our best people." They made no mention of trade secrets or any other legitimate business interest that would have been required to enforce the agreement in court. Instead, the CEO said that they had a "basically an open and shut case" because I couldn't take my "work experience" to their "closest competitor," which is nonsense. Not to mention that people at both companies have told me the companies weren't even competitors.

But the new company withdrew the offer to avoid having to go to court, so the facts and the law didn't matter.

This is how non-competes work.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#182

Post by harry8 »

Stratoscope wrote: post #65
harry8 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go right ahead and note the edit. You see it frequently around here, people write edit: I'm adding this bit for further explanation. I was being criticised rather heavily for responding to what was written as it didn't look "Charitable" in the light of subsequent expansion. It's right there still if you care to look. edit: this conversation thread has been completely de-railed by it. Was that the point? Who knows...

I hope you won't mind too much if I disagree with you about this. I don't personally find any value in remarks like "edit: fixed a typo and added a couple more sentences to help explain what I meant." I don't plan to start adding those kinds of remarks when I edit a comment. I don't care if other people do this, I just don't see any value in it myself, and I'm just as happy if people simply edit their comments withou…

Ok then don't edit your comment at all. Changing the context of the responses to make them look bad is a dk move full stop the end. Clear enough? Good o. Best.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#183

Post by didip »

amerberg wrote: post #181
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…

One came back to bite me: https://progressive.org/magazine/ties-that-bind/ They had a joke of a case. When they first threatened to sue after I'd given notice, the CEO told me he'd have to take legal action to set an example for the new company. Or as the head of HR put it "they can't take our best people." They made no mention of trade secrets or any other legitimate business interest that would have been required t…

Wow, that sucks! So, have you move on from that company?

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#184

Post by Stratoscope »

harry8 wrote: post #182
Stratoscope wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope you won't mind too much if I disagree with you about this. I don't personally find any value in remarks like "edit: fixed a typo and added a couple more sentences to help explain what I meant." I don't plan to start adding those kinds of remarks when I edit a comment. I don't care if other people do this, I just don't see any value in it myself, and I'm just as happy if people simply edit their comments withou…

Ok then don't edit your comment at all. Changing the context of the responses to make them look bad is a d k move full stop the end. Clear enough? Good o. Best.

I realize this is something you feel strongly about, but I will not be following your advice in this matter.

I hope we can remain friends, OK?

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#185

Post by Buttons840 »

microDude wrote: post #177
Buttons840 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Wow. What a horror story.

How were you taking IP? Just the knowledge you had in your head? What a joke.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#186

Post by amerberg »

didip wrote: post #183
amerberg wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One came back to bite me: https://progressive.org/magazine/ties-that-bind/ They had a joke of a case. When they first threatened to sue after I'd given notice, the CEO told me he'd have to take legal action to set an example for the new company. Or as the head of HR put it "they can't take our best people." They made no mention of trade secrets or any other legitimate business interest that would have been required t…

Wow, that sucks! So, have you move on from that company?

Yeah, after I submitted my resignation, I was given the choice between legal action and a promotion. I'd been performing at a very high level, been recommended for that promotion by my boss months earlier, only to have kicked it down the road by upper management. After I gave notice they offered to give it to me immediately, with a raise that made them almost competitive with the new company.

The legal threats almost scared me into staying, but then I thought about how miserable I would be if I went back there. The postponement of the promotion had been the least of my complaints, nothing else would be getting better, and I'd only be inviting further bullying in the future.

So I left. I didn't get sued because the new company dropped the offer before I started. I was unemployed for a couple of months and also spent a significant sum on a lawyer. The whole thing was expensive and stressful bordering on traumatic. But I've never regretted turning down the counteroffer.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#187

Post by URSpider94 »

mancerayder wrote: post #150
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…

> I'm glad I've wasted their time That's an odd attitude. You've also wasted your own time, yes? Wait, there's another approach. Sign the non-compete, and let them sue you, if they even notice that is, after you're in the new place. I had a boss that did this (which I saw happen live) nonchalantly. And managers are worth going after more than individual contributors in many cases. In the most recent case they went af…

I don’t recommend doing this.

To begin at the end, the standard legal remedy for violating a non compete is to enjoin you from working for your new employer. So then you are out of a job.

Yes, you can tell your new employer (in the hiring negotiation) that you have a noncompete, and tell them to clean up the mess for you. They’ll often do it, if you are valuable enough. For large employers, the common strategy is to negotiate down the time, and then stash you in an unrelated part of the business until that time is up. In the worst case, you go on “garden leave”, meaning you get paid to go home and work in your garden. You get the picture that they are not going to do this for a junior coder, it’s going to be for a senior leader or principal engineer.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#188

Post by snovv_crash »

mavelikara wrote: post #93
snovv_crash wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting 75% of your salary to do nothing for 2 years is the opportunity of a lifetime - travel the world, get a Masters degree, find a low CoL area and bank 90% of it while contributing to open source projects, the options are endless.

> Getting 75% of your salary to do nothing for 2 years is the opportunity of a lifetime The examples you listed makes me ask this. Imagine your parents, while raising you, given this option of having their pay reduced by 25%. How likely would the options you listed have been an "opportunity of a lifetime" to them?

Are you really saying that 100% of your time is worth 25% of your salary? And that isn't even counting work-related costs.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#189

Post by snovv_crash »

williamdclt wrote: post #125
snovv_crash wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting 75% of your salary to do nothing for 2 years is the opportunity of a lifetime - travel the world, get a Masters degree, find a low CoL area and bank 90% of it while contributing to open source projects, the options are endless.

I agree with you, but then you're not choosing. It might not be a right time for you to take a 2 years pause, you might really want to work for this competitor (which is why you're quitting)

Why would they get to choose? The moment they 'make' you sign the non-compete, quit and take your holiday.

Re: Too Many Workers Are Trapped by Non-Competes

#190

Post by icelancer »

dunpeal wrote: post #147
icelancer wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was a mid-tier engineer and was able to bargain them away because I was often recruited based on my open source contributions and community work. It's a pretty easy sell to say: "You found out about me because of this work, and it's going to continue, or you're going to pay X for me to stop it for Y years."

What does "open source contributions" and "community work" have to do with non-compete clauses? Non-competes prevent you from working for your employer's commercial competitors. I.E. if you leave Uber, you can't go work for Lyft. Also, it's naive to assume you can just "sell" an employer on a contractual change that goes against their goals. Saying "I'm a software engineer, and I plan to continue being a software eng…

> It's not about convincing anyone, it's about power and who has it.

Yes, you have to be good at your job and hard to replace before you make demands. That part should be obvious. At any rate, I've had plenty of success striking all non-compete agreements before starting my own business permanently. Just be good enough and hard to replace.

Post reply on HN