More like you are not allowed to work. Loss of work experience, loss network, not even accounting for inflation.
I would welcome an opportunity to walk away from the entire tech industry with a guaranteed-for-life income, allowing me to pursue dreams without them needing to be financially viable. Setting up as a high end timber boat builder without ever needing to turn a profit while still having the same income I do now is something I'd jump at immediately.
While I agree with the sentiment, you could lose that income at any time should they close to drop to non compete.
Plus, nobody says you can't work in any other field you like, just not whatever you used to do. Net present value of 50% of salary for the next 30 years is something like a million dollars for most HN commenters, I'd guess.
Except it's not "for life". It's until they feel free to lift the non-compete. My guess is that most information you take from a company is irrelevant in a couple years. Maybe 5 tops? Plus it'd almost certainly end with zero notice. You'd get a email saying "you're free to go". Suddenly. After say 26 months. So it's not like a "pension for life" - just a gap in your employment history.
Oh no, ah jeez, slightly more than one year of income for zero effort, darn.
Any employment gap can be easily explained by saying "I was under a non-compete and being paid garden leave while working on personal projects to keep my skills fresh". It's very common in e.g. the finance world, I believe.
In some countries that's illegal. So when presented with a contract that contains such claims, I have 2 options: 1) ask them to remove it... and so I risk not getting the job 2) don't say anything, and sign it If I'm really interested in the job, I'll go for option 2 because I know they cannot enforce such claims, so I'll be fine.
There's option 3, and that's: don't say anything, strike some passages and sign it.
Whether that's a good idea, that depends on the circumstances but I'm just noting it as an option.
Not just employment contracts, some companies require NDA just for interviews.
IF you go to an interview, and nothing was divulged to you, this NDA does not mean anything. But if youwork at a competitor, and you get an interviewer tell you things that the company does not want to divulge, company has some protection. Not all laws and processes are bad.
Seems like the company should not opt to divulge that information then.
Not only in the US; without going into too much detail, many countries in south America and Africa have strong business connections with the US, and it is quite common to see the ever-abusive dumb dumb US contract templates being used in those countries, even when local law differs significantly. Usually, the posture is "we can do whatever you want and you keep your mouth shut, or else we'll sue you for everything".…
On a personal note, I once was presented with such a (US) contract that also required me to list every NDA I had signed to date; Since then, I always assume most US lawyers are beyond incompetent.
We have been sued over signed contracts many times over the 3 decades we are in business. Almost only by US companies, but well, shitty for them, Dutch judges (and lawyers) rather laugh about those overbearing things in those contracts. We don't even need a lawyer before we sign them as we know they are worth nothing here. And that's been tested many times now. Fyi; we didn't break them; it's just that we are tech troubleshooters-for-hire and we work for many companies (1000s) over time; the suing is always the paranoid delusions were the contract states we cannot provide our services for any competitors of them or even companies that are not competing but in the same market forever and ever. F offfff. But yeah, it costs them a lot of money and we are insured for it (which is cheap compared); we don't waste any time or money on this.
A few years ago an American company that approached me (UK based) about a job opportunity insisted I sign an NDA before I could interview with them. I refused and they couldn't understand why so they even put me in contact with one of their lawyers. I still refused, and they eventually relented, but I could never understand why I'd need to sign an NDA to attend a job interview. There's literally no benefit to me in d…
If you’re an employee under NDA, and your company considers almost everything about your work to be confidential, you can’t effectively paint a detailed picture for the role.
The NDA gives them some protection to answer your questions openly and transparently.
On a personal note, I once was presented with such a (US) contract that also required me to list every NDA I had signed to date; Since then, I always assume most US lawyers are beyond incompetent.
That's funny. Some NDAs I've signed prohibit you from mentioning any contact with the company involved (thus you're not allowed to mention the NDA) so my answer would be; "Under the terms of NDAs I have signed I am not free to disclose that list."
In some countries that's illegal. So when presented with a contract that contains such claims, I have 2 options: 1) ask them to remove it... and so I risk not getting the job 2) don't say anything, and sign it If I'm really interested in the job, I'll go for option 2 because I know they cannot enforce such claims, so I'll be fine.
There's option 3, and that's: don't say anything, strike some passages and sign it. Whether that's a good idea, that depends on the circumstances but I'm just noting it as an option.
Yeah, good luck being the odd one out who wants special individualized contract. This might work for unicorn value level employees that are poached from one FANG to another but not for the average Joe.
In my experience, as a normal non-unicorn employee at a large corp, I was able to have my contract modified. It required advice from an employment law lawyer that cost a few hundred dollars and a couple emails with the company’s general counsel. You can change these contracts. Hiring people is difficult and once the company has made that decision they don’t want to lose you over a contract clause.
Some companies are literally legally barred from individualising employment contracts due to active union or government contracts they have.