We really need general regulations on non-competes. Bare minimum, it should be required that a company pay you a full salary if they want to block you from seeking employment elsewhere with your skills. If a company really cares that much about stopping competitors from taking advantage of your skillset, they need to be willing to pay up.
That still is anticompetitive.
FTC cracks down on companies that impose harmful noncompete restrictions
11–20 of 189 posts
Re: FTC cracks down on companies that impose harmful noncompete restrictions
#12We really need general regulations on non-competes. Bare minimum, it should be required that a company pay you a full salary if they want to block you from seeking employment elsewhere with your skills. If a company really cares that much about stopping competitors from taking advantage of your skillset, they need to be willing to pay up.
Then how would a company protect it's trade secrets?
You are never allowed to steal trade secrets or use them elsewhere even if you didn’t sign any agreement about it.
An NDA isn’t even technically required. There are state and national laws which blanket ban using trade secrets outside of the company you worked for.
Re: FTC cracks down on companies that impose harmful noncompete restrictions
#13Re: FTC cracks down on companies that impose harmful noncompete restrictions
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then how would a company protect it's trade secrets?
Trade secrets are already strongly and strictly protected at national and state level regardless of non compete agreements. You are never allowed to steal trade secrets or use them elsewhere even if you didn’t sign any agreement about it. An NDA isn’t even technically required. There are state and national laws which blanket ban using trade secrets outside of the company you worked for.
Not saying anything is right or wrong, just that when something is illegal doesn't mean it prevents that crime.
Re: FTC cracks down on companies that impose harmful noncompete restrictions
#15We really need general regulations on non-competes. Bare minimum, it should be required that a company pay you a full salary if they want to block you from seeking employment elsewhere with your skills. If a company really cares that much about stopping competitors from taking advantage of your skillset, they need to be willing to pay up.
That still is anticompetitive.
Re: FTC cracks down on companies that impose harmful noncompete restrictions
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trade secrets are already strongly and strictly protected at national and state level regardless of non compete agreements. You are never allowed to steal trade secrets or use them elsewhere even if you didn’t sign any agreement about it. An NDA isn’t even technically required. There are state and national laws which blanket ban using trade secrets outside of the company you worked for.
How would a previous employer know what a former employee is telling their current employer about what they know from their former employer? Not saying anything is right or wrong, just that when something is illegal doesn't mean it prevents that crime.
Re: FTC cracks down on companies that impose harmful noncompete restrictions
#17We really need general regulations on non-competes. Bare minimum, it should be required that a company pay you a full salary if they want to block you from seeking employment elsewhere with your skills. If a company really cares that much about stopping competitors from taking advantage of your skillset, they need to be willing to pay up.
Re: FTC cracks down on companies that impose harmful noncompete restrictions
#18We really need general regulations on non-competes. Bare minimum, it should be required that a company pay you a full salary if they want to block you from seeking employment elsewhere with your skills. If a company really cares that much about stopping competitors from taking advantage of your skillset, they need to be willing to pay up.
Then how would a company protect it's trade secrets?
Re: FTC cracks down on companies that impose harmful noncompete restrictions
#19I remember them saying Accuweather is close to the main campus of Penn State which has a large meteorology program. They were saying if you joined accuweather and quit you couldn't work in any weather related field for 5 years after leaving accuweather. Basically the NDA locked you in and you were a prisoner.
Re: FTC cracks down on companies that impose harmful noncompete restrictions
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
How would a previous employer know what a former employee is telling their current employer about what they know from their former employer? Not saying anything is right or wrong, just that when something is illegal doesn't mean it prevents that crime.
Yeah but than the person is liable and could be charged in that case
> Anthony Scott Levandowski pleaded guilty and was sentenced today to 18 months in prison for trade secret theft related to Google’s self-driving car program, announced United States Attorney David L. Anderson and John F. Bennett, Special Agent in Charge of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Levandowski was also ordered to pay a $95,000 fine and $756,499.22 in restitution.