Live data from Hacker News

FTC cracks down on companies that impose harmful noncompete restrictions

ftc.gov

121–130 of 189 posts

Re: FTC cracks down on companies that impose harmful noncompete restrictions

#121

I wish federal law would just abolish non-competes completely. When I gave advanced notice to Tudor Investment that I would be quitting they threatened to fire me with cause so that they could still enforce the non-compete without paying me in accordance with NY state law. And they followed through with their threat, sending me a letter telling me I was being terminated with cause the day I officially quit. To make t…

If you just ignore the non-compete, you can make them do the suing.

Re: FTC cracks down on companies that impose harmful noncompete restrictions

#122
post #61

Noncompetes should 100% require full-paid gardening leave to be enforceable. You don't want me ot work for a competitor for a year? Great. You get to pay me full pay and benefits for that year. Let's see how keen companies are to enforce a noncompete then. Even then they should be limited in scope but without paid gardening leave they should be utterly unenforceable.

Paid noncompete (gardening leave) is pretty common on Wall Street. It has gotten much more prevalent in the last 5-10 years, with companies ratcheting up the length and enforcing it on lower and lower level employees. Think - IC software engineers working on some random UI with no idea of current positions or trading strategies, making like $300k total being put on a 12 month leave. The problem even with paid noncomp…

I'd love that so much. I get paid a noncompete and can go on to work for someone else and how are they going to find out?

Re: FTC cracks down on companies that impose harmful noncompete restrictions

#123

[flagged]

The cancer warning label thing is one. It's basically slapped on just about everything now so everybody either ignores it or blindly follows it and in both cases the law is not helping the consumer. It has also driven up the cost of producing goods which is passed on to the consumer because companies either avoid the cert and apply the label or go through the time and effort of getting the cert.

From what I've read about Prop 65, it resulted in an actual reduction of toxic substances in products. The silly label was an unintended consequence, but is the only one that anybody has ever heard of.

Re: FTC cracks down on companies that impose harmful noncompete restrictions

#124

[flagged]

Ideology divide between the coasts and bulk of the state, water management, mishandling inner city social issues like crime and homelessness, a sense of smug superiority, restricting residential development while leaving commercial development unchecked, ridiculous cost of living and lack of housing for low paid service workers…

Ideology divide between the coasts and bulk of the state,

I'm assuming by bulk you mean land not population size. This is also present in many states and I don't see how it's a problem.

"Smug superiority" who? Is it based on some survey? Seems subjective.

"restricting residential development while leaving commercial development unchecked"

Is this unqiue to California? Is commercial real estate development unchecked, provide a source

The cost of living isn't high everywhere in the state.

Re: FTC cracks down on companies that impose harmful noncompete restrictions

#126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paid noncompete (gardening leave) is pretty common on Wall Street. It has gotten much more prevalent in the last 5-10 years, with companies ratcheting up the length and enforcing it on lower and lower level employees. Think - IC software engineers working on some random UI with no idea of current positions or trading strategies, making like $300k total being put on a 12 month leave. The problem even with paid noncomp…

I'd love that so much. I get paid a noncompete and can go on to work for someone else and how are they going to find out?

A lot of the high paying industries with non-competes are small and insular. If you violate your non-compete and are found out you will go to arbitration, probably get fired from your new job and have expensive legal fees (half the cost of arbitration + your lawyer). That's before the results of the arbitration.

Re: FTC cracks down on companies that impose harmful noncompete restrictions

#127
post #50
post #19

15 or so years ago I worked in a small company that specialized in wind predictions and was me and 10 meteorologists I 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 pr…

Not surprising from them. See this for more on their history: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-06-14/trump-s-p...

https://archive.is/OFGnD

Re: FTC cracks down on companies that impose harmful noncompete restrictions

#128
post #77

[flagged]

Almost everything out of the initiative system (arguably, the design of the system); high state spending for mediocre outcomes; "big" (state) government in general. NIMBY housing policy in every major metro. Unsustainable water use for water intensive crops in a state that is mostly desert.

"high state spending for mediocre outcomes"

"NIMBY housing policy in every major metro"

Prove it and show me it's not an issue in other states

"Unsustainable water use for water intensive crops in a state that is mostly desert. "

According to ABC https://abcnews.go.com/US/map-ongoing-water-crises-happening...

This is a major issue in other states. In fact Jackson Mississippi ran out of water last year yet this hasn't happened in CA "

Post reply on HN