When the Guy Making Your Sandwich Has a Noncompete Clause • Hacker News Board

Re: When the Guy Making Your Sandwich Has a Noncompete Clause

#51

Post by ceejayoz » Tue, Oct 14, 2014, 8:43 PM UTC

VLM wrote: post #16

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #5

This got a little too typically NYT generic and preachy at the end -- I was expecting either an altar call or somebody to pass a collection plate -- but the specific case about non-competes deserves some attention. For all the things California is doing to drive out businesses, one great thing about the state is that non-competes have very little weight. (In fact, this was what led Google and Apple to screw over the…

"The measures are very rarely enforced" Don't get into an agreement you're not willing to enforce... lets be realistic, the victims are judgment proof, if they lose, the company might be able to repo their hat or apron, that's about it. Most likely result is if you quit and tell your boss you're going to a competitor of any sort in the food service industry, you won't get your last pay check. It'll cost too much to g…

Attempting to withhold a paycheck for hours worked will get the Feds involved, for free, very quickly.

Re: When the Guy Making Your Sandwich Has a Noncompete Clause

#52

Post by ceejayoz » Tue, Oct 14, 2014, 8:45 PM UTC

bsbechtel wrote: post #18

pyrocat wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It costs much less to start a small business" Ok, I'll bite. In what way does starting a small business "cost less"? Less than what? Have you ever tried to get a loan to start a retail restaurant? It's incredibly difficult to get the funding necessary, especially in an industry with such low margins.

Retail fast food restaurant - All these businesses can be started with either 1) personal savings, 2) a family and friends loan, or 3) credit cards. They all also have the advantage of generating cash from day 1, vs a tech startup which can have substantial development time.

That $50k is about three years worth of the $8.50 salary you cite. They're not going to have it in savings, no bank will give them that much credit, and your friends/family tend to be in the same socioeconomic situation as you.

Re: When the Guy Making Your Sandwich Has a Noncompete Clause

#53

Post by jackmaney » Tue, Oct 14, 2014, 8:45 PM UTC

mratzloff wrote: post #40

drivingmenuts wrote: post #2

Their food is disappointing and now their business practices are, too? I'm really wishing the NYT had tried to get a comment from Jimmy John's corporate before publication. I'd love to hear their justification for that.

Here's all I really need to know about the company: http://www.smilepolitely.com/splog/jimmy_john_is_a_big_man._... I used to eat there pretty regularly until I saw those photos. I haven't ate there since.

0_0

Fuck...I've eaten there fairly regularly myself. No longer.

Re: When the Guy Making Your Sandwich Has a Noncompete Clause

#54

Post by nhangen » Tue, Oct 14, 2014, 8:46 PM UTC

jessaustin wrote: post #42

nhangen wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm guessing they don't want to spend time training people only to have them leave for another shop. I wonder if there is a limit on this clause?

Maybe I'm a clueless jackass, but I've made sandwiches before, and I've seen sandwiches made in sandwich shops before, and I can't imagine this "training" taking longer than a shift. The training that isn't directly related to sandwiches, e.g. how to stock the cooler and where the dumpster is located, is likely to vary from shop to shop. Most hiring shop managers are going to look more closely at how long one has hel…

I'm thinking more about the type of training that teaches someone to be a responsible worker, productive, show up on time, etc.

Re: When the Guy Making Your Sandwich Has a Noncompete Clause

#55

Post by DanBC » Tue, Oct 14, 2014, 8:48 PM UTC

lotsofmangos wrote: post #9

bsbechtel wrote: post #6

The article has a pretty obvious slant in one direction. A lot of times small businesses will require this of their entry level workers not because they are afraid of their workers going to a competitor, but don't want their employees to go and start a competing business, which in the small business world is a very real risk. It costs much less to start a small business, and in the local market many of these small bu…

"The article has a pretty obvious slant in one direction." I noticed there's a signpost pointing down that way as well. There's some writing on it saying 'Sanity'. You may want to stroll that way a little.

42 minutes and your direct personal attack - which also contains stigmatising language about mental health - is not grey.

:-/

Re: When the Guy Making Your Sandwich Has a Noncompete Clause

#56

Post by frankc » Tue, Oct 14, 2014, 8:51 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #10

bsbechtel wrote: post #6

The article has a pretty obvious slant in one direction. A lot of times small businesses will require this of their entry level workers not because they are afraid of their workers going to a competitor, but don't want their employees to go and start a competing business, which in the small business world is a very real risk. It costs much less to start a small business, and in the local market many of these small bu…

I am confused by what appears to be an assertion that Jimmy John's has a legitimate concern that their minimum-wage-earning food service employees might leave to start a competing national sandwich chain.

Of course the vast majority of them are no threat, but you should not assume every fast food employee is in it for the pay. If you are committed to opening a hamburger shop, you go and get a job at a hamburger shop for a few months to get some experience, see how they operate, maybe even pick up some ideas in terms of recipes, though usually its more learning the operations rather than stealing recipes. I know for a fact that this is a real thing because I know people who have done it in the taco truck business. If you are opening a hamburger shop without significant hamburger shop experience and you don't do this, you are a moron.

Doesn't mean blanket non-compete is fair, but to completely dismiss the OPs point it at best naive.

Re: When the Guy Making Your Sandwich Has a Noncompete Clause

#57

Post by larrys » Tue, Oct 14, 2014, 8:51 PM UTC

notacoward wrote: post #28

nissimk wrote: post #19

Non compete clauses do not make sense for employees that are not highly compensated. They are a violation of the 13th amendment and frequently unenforceable. This doesn't stop people from trying to use them as a tool to increase employee retention especially in the face of poor work conditions and bad management. If an employer insists on one, you should ask for compensation. Make sure they agree to pay you some amou…

One of the problems with being poor is that you might not be able to afford lawyers to contest a suit over a non-compete. Therefore, we can't rely on post hoc legal remedies. Companies need to be proactively prevented, via regulation, from trying to pull this kind of stuff.

"One of the problems with being poor is that you might not be able to afford lawyers to contest a suit over a non-compete. "

But even if you have money that doesn't mean it makes economic sense to pay for an attorney's time and file suit. Even attorneys don't file a lawsuit just because they can. Their time is worth money and there is also the opportunity cost.

Likewise it works both ways. Take a developer who doesn't complete a project yet collects $6000 from someone as a deposit. Doesn't pay to bring a lawsuit even if you can afford an attorney. [1]

[1] An actual case I was the one out the $6000 deposit. I walked away from it (and I'm glad as it would have been tons of aggravation as well as attorney fees).

Re: When the Guy Making Your Sandwich Has a Noncompete Clause

#58

Post by rbcgerard » Tue, Oct 14, 2014, 8:52 PM UTC

johnward wrote: post #35

jakozaur wrote: post #32

Two models that make sense: - California, non-competes are not enforceable - Poland, you can make non-compete for the time you pay full salary (e.g. if company wants you to restrict employment for 3 months after leaving it, you will get your salary during that period)

My understanding of the CA model was that they are unenforceable except for when an employee has a controlling interest in the company. For example you could enforce a non-compete on a co-owner who tried to create a competing service. At least that's the way I interpreted it.

yeah my understanding is that it is very state-to-state - I think in TX they are unenforceable unless they are part of the sale of a business in which you are an owner and hence receive compensation as part of the sale...

Re: When the Guy Making Your Sandwich Has a Noncompete Clause

#59

Post by bsbechtel » Tue, Oct 14, 2014, 8:53 PM UTC

pyrocat wrote: post #30

bsbechtel wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Retail fast food restaurant - All these businesses can be started with either 1) personal savings, 2) a family and friends loan, or 3) credit cards. They all also have the advantage of generating cash from day 1, vs a tech startup which can have substantial development time.

You're very out of touch with the life of a minimum wage worker. I'm not sure what I can do to fix that, but maybe just step back and think about who you're defending and why.

What do you do for a living? I run a business that competes with fast food franchises for low wage labor. A great majority of our employees aren't poor, or struggling to get by, but college kids who are looking to make a little extra cash and get some work experience. A small handful are children of parents who have millions in the bank, and have no need to work other than it's something to do, and maybe to gain some necessary life skills. A number of them also wish to start their own small business one day (I always ask, because I would rather convince the ones who do to start a franchise for us). We have them sign a non-compete because a large portion of our competitive edge comes from operational efficiencies that our competitors can't touch, but aren't necessarily exclusive or proprietary. We also tripled in growth in the past year, and pay our employees higher wages than virtually any alternative job they could acquire elsewhere. The risk that one of these employees would try to start a competing business is very real, and someone who is resourceful enough to do so is also probably resourceful enough to pose a significant threat to our business. Yes, many of the employees we hire probably won't ever try to do this, with or without the non-compete, but all it takes is one employee who wishes to do so and has the financial backing to make it happen to significantly hurt our business.

I appreciate your judgement on my knowledge of the life of a minimum wage worker. Yes, there are many who are struggling to get by, this is a very real problem that needs to be fixed. However, generalizing the skill set and struggles of a few to an entire wage class of labor is absurd. You're talking about millions of individuals in just as many different live situations across thousands of local markets. I would advise you to rethink your assessment of the life of a minimum wage worker. You might want to add a little complexity and depth to your profile of the minimum wage worker.

Re: When the Guy Making Your Sandwich Has a Noncompete Clause

#60

Post by VLM » Tue, Oct 14, 2014, 8:54 PM UTC

x0x0 wrote: post #48

eggoa wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As VLM notes elswhere in this thread, being poor also means you're usually "judgment proof" (i.e. too poor to be worth suing).

But it's often the next employer that is intimidated into not hiring you. So the poor person gets fucked.

Most employers don't waste time on references given the legal liabilities, references are only required as a tradition, to prove you know how to play the game, so I think they're safe... with the sole exception of the camp counselor. Given contact with kids, I'd like to at least imagine they would try to background check. Even then they probably don't and rely on 3rd party professionals.

You have to be realistic about these kind of things. If, under better economic conditions, adults would never work these jobs and it would all be "teens first job" then they're not going to be geared up to check references or prior employers and they're not going to care if you leave your previous employer section blank. You don't need a stellar resume to meet the minimum requirements to flip burgers and if you show up with a stellar resume it proves you don't know how to play the game and they will politely tell you you're overqualified, until you learn to play the game.