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

Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 206 posts

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#101

Post by belval »

d4mi3n wrote: post #84
cortesoft wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s the same rule as California… you can have a non-compete, but that time has to be paid for separately than your normal wages.

This is probably one of the biggest reasons I'm unlikely to leave the state until other parts of the US make similar determinations. It boggles me that we allow employers to have so much control over an employees life after they have left said organization .

For all but some very egregious cases this will not be enforced. AWS lost a bunch of VP-level execs and they went to work at Microsoft... If they didn't use it against them they won't use it against anyone.

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#102

Post by mi100hael »

Amazon will enforce them at the exec level, but courts have ruled they aren't a total blanket ban on employment elsewhere, just a restriction on what you can do for that new employer.

"This past October, a federal judge placed major limitations on his Moyer’s role while also criticizing Amazon’s non-compete policies. Moyer was not allowed to work on any financial services projects, his area of expertise at AWS, for Google Cloud. He was also barred from contacting any AWS customers and any potential financial services customers. The conditions were to stay in place until the lawsuit was fully resolved, or until his non-compete expired in November 2020."

https://www.geekwire.com/2020/amazon-settles-non-compete-law...

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#103

Post by sulam »

anonymousiam wrote: post #58
zeruch wrote: post #18

If you are in certain states (e.g. California) non-comps are almost wholly unenforceable and many folks will happily sign them knowing even a company like AWS won't be able to do squat. Jurisdiction matters, as non-comps are common, and many firms rely on a lack of knowing to pressure folks into behaving the way they like, regardless of actual legal sturdiness.

Signing such an agreement for a California job might still affect your ability to relocate to another state for a position with a competitor.

I'd be surprised if their CA employment agreements even have the non-compete in them, and any halfway-competent lawyer will be able to redline that portion as un-enforceable. This is a bedrock rule in CA employment. If it had any enforceability at all, we would know.

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#104

Post by CJefferson »

forty wrote: post #31
MeNotLawyer wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious then what people do when they leave AWS. Do they just not work for 18 months?

I'm not sure, but I feel there might be companies that are not selling cloud hosting solutions ;) Also, once again, do check the law where you live. It's very possible that non-compete only apply on stuff you worked on. For example, maybe if you did not work on S3 specifically, you might even be able to work on Google Cloud Storage if all you are considering are companies that make public clouds.

Notice it doesn't say AWS, it says Amazon. That covers a lot more than cloud hosting solutions!

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#105

Post by grumple »

pcaharrier wrote: post #76
vlovich123 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AWS definitely has offices and employees in California. The enforcement is not about where you're headquartered but where the employee is determined to be working. An employee living full time in California would be protected. Disclaimer: Not a lawyer.

Not necessarily. Many such contracts also contain a choice of law clause that specifies which state's laws will apply.

The same "not necessarily" would presumably apply to the choice of law clause as well, for example if California decided they didn't want a company attempting to evade their laws with such a clause, which presumably would be at the discretion of a judge who probably isn't too fond of that behavior.

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#106

Post by gnopgnip »

You should get a consult with an employment attorney before agreeing to this to understand the specifics. In WA, very likely enforceable if you make over $100k. Also they are unlikely to negotiate for a non executive position.

If you are in CA(or ND or a few others) this would not be an issue at all. Non competes are illegal with few exceptions.

Amazon does have a history of enforcing this against competing employers/former employees, against working at google or microsoft specifically

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#107

Post by apostate »

infogulch wrote: post #30
forty wrote: post #15

You should better consult a lawyer than a bunch of random people if this is important for you. Or better yet: not work for a company that tries to make you sign such agreements. And especially not this one :) I don't know where you live. In my country (France) overly broad non compete are not enforceable, and also you need to be paid during the non compete period (at least 1/3 of your compensation or something like t…

> [in France] you need to be paid during the non compete period (at least 1/3 of your compensation or something like this) Oh that's interesting. That is the first time I've seen a justifiable contractual consideration on the employer's side for a non-compete.

This is common in the financial industry above a certain level; it's called "garden leave".

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#108

Post by pkilgore »

infogulch wrote: post #30
forty wrote: post #15

You should better consult a lawyer than a bunch of random people if this is important for you. Or better yet: not work for a company that tries to make you sign such agreements. And especially not this one :) I don't know where you live. In my country (France) overly broad non compete are not enforceable, and also you need to be paid during the non compete period (at least 1/3 of your compensation or something like t…

> [in France] you need to be paid during the non compete period (at least 1/3 of your compensation or something like this) Oh that's interesting. That is the first time I've seen a justifiable contractual consideration on the employer's side for a non-compete.

I've heard of them in finance in the states, mostly, but I believe they do exist.

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#109

Post by bqmjjx0kac »

rsstack wrote: post #52
bqmjjx0kac wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been getting a few emails from Amazon recruiters weekly to both my personal and work emails.

I complained to jeff@ about the spam from recruiters, after emailing them several times to stop contacting me - and even calling the recruiters on the phone once asking them to stop. The final reply in my email thread with them: "I will take a look at these messages and will inform our recruiting team of your concern if these messages are found to be legitimate. Thank you again for sharing your concerns. I wish you w…

That's hilarious, I had no idea his email was public. I have to wonder whether the response was written by an assistant, though.

Re: Ask HN: Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

#110

Post by dboreham »

Not a lawyer, but I have seen this exact thing in the past and discussed it with our lawyer. He advised to say that the scope was overly broad, point out as you have that AMZN does absolutely everything, suggest that you either see what they say in response, or you suggest you would be happy to agree to a reasonable narrowly scoped provision (e.g. not to work on products directly competitive to the products you worked on at AMZN).

I'm not sure making this about confidential information is helpful -- there are already other provisions in the contract, I'm sure, relating to that.

In general yes all contracts are up for renegotiation and in house lawyers fully expect this kind of push back. If they rescind the offer then they're a.holes and you shouldn't work for them anyway.

It seems to be a concept in law that you can't enforce overly broad and unreasonable provisions like this so they are being a bit cheeky slipping it in anyway. Again there's a legal term I forget for this but it means "something only a fool would agree to".

Post reply on HN