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

Massachusetts Governor Announces Plan to Abolish Noncompetes

bostinno.streetwise.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–119 of 119 posts

Re: Massachusetts Governor Announces Plan to Abolish Noncompetes

#111

Post by dredmorbius »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #69
tptacek wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the general pattern I'm referring to is: * Candidate inbound * Has presumably-unenforceable noncompete * Prospective employer made aware of noncompete * Prospective employer concerned that former employer might make a claim that the hiring process constituted knowing interference with a contract, and that that claim might be colorable even if the noncompete had no teeth. * No hire

I know of at least one company (Microsoft) that goes the extra mile and stipulates in your non-compete that you must show every future employer the non-compete that you signed. It would seem like that is only in there because Microsoft has very intimidating teeth. I also heard a rumor that when Google takes their talent, they send them down to the bay area for 18 months to dodge WA's non-compete friendly laws. But I'…

Microsoft has successfully enforced its non-competes against at least two California firms, Saleseforce and Google:

"The inherent unfairness of employee non-compete agreements: Judge rules former Microsoft executive can't take new Salesforce job"

http://www.itworld.com/legal/138182/inherent-unfairness-empl...

"Microsoft Googles 'Non-Compete Agreement'"

http://www.searchnewz.com/microsoft-googles-non-compete-agre...

The maker of Windows and the Xbox has filed suit over Google’s hiring of a former Microsoft executive.

Google hired Kai-Fu Lee, formerly the corporate VP of Microsoft’s Interactive Services Division, to run Google’s China operations.

Re: Massachusetts Governor Announces Plan to Abolish Noncompetes

#112

Post by dennisgorelik »

greggman wrote: post #109
grellas wrote: post #97

Non-compete clauses have their place in the law but they have in my view been abused in the employment context. The classic case of a good reason for having an enforceable non-compete arises with the sale of goodwill in a business. Proprietor X sells his business for $10M and then sets up shop next door to steal the customers of the business back to his new, competing one. In effect, this is a case of theft. Someone…

I agree with you 100%. But as an anecdote I know full time employee that was supposed to be working on a football game for company ABC. He had an arrangement to work from home. He worked for ~1 year and appeared to be very behind schedule. He then quit, started his own company, 3 months later his company shipped a football game.

Cases like that could be enforced like fraud (or stealing work time). There is no point to invoke non-compete here.

Re: Massachusetts Governor Announces Plan to Abolish Noncompetes

#113

Post by lawnchair_larry »

dredmorbius wrote: post #111
lawnchair_larry wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know of at least one company (Microsoft) that goes the extra mile and stipulates in your non-compete that you must show every future employer the non-compete that you signed. It would seem like that is only in there because Microsoft has very intimidating teeth. I also heard a rumor that when Google takes their talent, they send them down to the bay area for 18 months to dodge WA's non-compete friendly laws. But I'…

Microsoft has successfully enforced its non-competes against at least two California firms, Saleseforce and Google: "The inherent unfairness of employee non-compete agreements: Judge rules former Microsoft executive can't take new Salesforce job" http://www.itworld.com/legal/138182/inherent-unfairness-empl... "Microsoft Googles 'Non-Compete Agreement'" http://www.searchnewz.com/microsoft-googles-non-compete-agre... T…

Wow, so it would seem that one can't simply move out of state...or even out of the country. That's just wrong.

Re: Massachusetts Governor Announces Plan to Abolish Noncompetes

#114

Post by MisterBastahrd »

chris_mahan wrote: post #105
MisterBastahrd wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps you should learn something about sales instead of being so incredibly obtuse. When an employer sends a salesman out to sell his product, he is sending him out on the company dime to wine and dine customers and get them to sign that contract for services rendered or product delivered. This costs the employer a great deal of money. The salesperson is worth nothing except for the relationships he can create betw…

But the real reality is that it's the salesperson the client is forming a relationship with, and that it's the salesman they trust to get stuff done. Also, companies often like to hire experienced salesmen _because_ of their rolodex. (Do they still use rolodexes?)

Companies don't trust sales reps for the most part. They use them, but they don't trust them. Hence the trade secrets clauses in their employment agreements. Companies like to hire experienced sales reps because of their contact list? Sure, because if that employee's former employer hits them with a lawsuit, they can fire the employee and settle out of court. It's worth the potential risk. At the same time, there aren't many companies that are going to stand behind a brand new employee when they know he's probably holding onto data that is considered a trade secret.

What happens when your previous employer fired you for using data you stole from a previous client?

Good luck taking years to build back your reputation.

Re: Massachusetts Governor Announces Plan to Abolish Noncompetes

#115

Post by Shivetya »

grellas wrote: post #97

Non-compete clauses have their place in the law but they have in my view been abused in the employment context. The classic case of a good reason for having an enforceable non-compete arises with the sale of goodwill in a business. Proprietor X sells his business for $10M and then sets up shop next door to steal the customers of the business back to his new, competing one. In effect, this is a case of theft. Someone…

my least favorite, having employees sign essentially the same when leaving a company. Really, watched a friend go through this recently. It was that or lose his accumulated vacation monies which were not insignificant.

Been through the non compete issue post hiring, in job for many years when it lands in everyone's inbox. Really? So I am all for them being punted.

Re: Massachusetts Governor Announces Plan to Abolish Noncompetes

#116

Post by furyg3 »

Shivetya wrote: post #115
grellas wrote: post #97

Non-compete clauses have their place in the law but they have in my view been abused in the employment context. The classic case of a good reason for having an enforceable non-compete arises with the sale of goodwill in a business. Proprietor X sells his business for $10M and then sets up shop next door to steal the customers of the business back to his new, competing one. In effect, this is a case of theft. Someone…

my least favorite, having employees sign essentially the same when leaving a company. Really, watched a friend go through this recently. It was that or lose his accumulated vacation monies which were not insignificant. Been through the non compete issue post hiring, in job for many years when it lands in everyone's inbox. Really? So I am all for them being punted.

I don't know where your friend worked, but (most places) in treat accrued vacation money as pay. Meaning the employer must pay it out when you leave.

Re: Massachusetts Governor Announces Plan to Abolish Noncompetes

#117

Post by walshemj »

qwerta wrote: post #15
dsr_ wrote: post #2

I've been asked to sign a post-employment non-compete agreement several times. I never have, because I ask for a simple stipulation: for the length of time you don't want me to work in this field, you need to pay me the same salary. Everyone agrees that this is fair, and then never mentions the non-compete agreement again.

Czech republic and some other EU country actually have this in law. If employee with non-compete clause loses his job, employer has to pay his salary in full for duration of non compete. There are some exceptions such gross misconduct, voluntary redundancy etc..

Surprised that Eu law doesn't restrict the use of non competes - must rember to ask about that as I am due a refesher course on employment law.

Re: Massachusetts Governor Announces Plan to Abolish Noncompetes

#119

Post by [deleted] »

greggman wrote: post #109
grellas wrote: post #97

Non-compete clauses have their place in the law but they have in my view been abused in the employment context. The classic case of a good reason for having an enforceable non-compete arises with the sale of goodwill in a business. Proprietor X sells his business for $10M and then sets up shop next door to steal the customers of the business back to his new, competing one. In effect, this is a case of theft. Someone…

I agree with you 100%. But as an anecdote I know full time employee that was supposed to be working on a football game for company ABC. He had an arrangement to work from home. He worked for ~1 year and appeared to be very behind schedule. He then quit, started his own company, 3 months later his company shipped a football game.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN