Live data from Hacker News

Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

penguindreams.org

61–70 of 295 posts

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#61
For my current consulting job I signed a contract with a non-compete clause for 1.5 years (and a similar relation clause - which forbids me to work with any relation of my employer for 1.5 years). I did discuss this with both my employer and friends in the industry. In the end my employer convinced me that it's non-negotiable and standard in consulting (which, I think, is true).

This is kind of bitter, as I plan to leave this company after half a year (work is not challenging, I feel lonely since the rest of my team is offshore, not happy with the pay, 3 hour commute every day, many unpaid hours).

I don't assume my employer will start a fuzz, since it's a nice company in general (just not for me). However, I can imagine that this could be a major problem if I left the company on bad terms (since they are basically a vanilla IT company, and most companies could be a client or relationship).

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#62
I see a lot of stories/comments about not signing non-compete agreements on HN, so I want to throw in my own 2 cents.

Many times, companies have standard paperwork that they want you to sign and they don't want to deal with the hassle of hiring someone who won't sign the forms that their lawyers already drafted. Making modifications means that they have to call up their lawyer (who charges $300+/hour), have a conversation where the lawyer tries to convince them why they should keep the clause in, and then pay said lawyer to modify the contract. It's a hassle at the very least and it makes you look like a difficult person to deal with. So think carefully about negotiating on this, because it means less room to negotiate in other areas.

There are people out there who have a strong moral conviction against non-competes and who refuse to sign them. Power to those people. I don't care much for these agreements myself. But if you are thinking in practical rather than principled terms, I think it makes sense for many people to just sign the paper and move on.

What it comes down to is this: How likely are you to ever want to work for a direct competitor of this company?

If you are a chemical engineer working for a drug company, you are likely to find your next employment offer from another drug company and they very likely compete with your current employer. So be careful. But if you are a software engineer joining, for example, Dropbox, a non-compete might prohibit you from taking your next job at Box, Backblaze or any other online storage company, but it's very likely that you won't want your next job to be at a cloud storage company anyway, so think about that when deciding about whether to sign a non-compete.

In general, the more specialized your skillset is, the more you should care about non-competes. But as my lawyer once told me before I signed a pretty lengthy non-compete contract, "sometimes it's best to just sign the thing and not worry about it. You're almost certainly never going to work for a direct competitor anyway".

edit: Added emphasis above on the word "many", in response to rgbreneer's comment below. It's not that I don't think you should blindly sign non-compete agreements. It's that, like it or not, many employers don't like dealing with the hassle of someone who won't sign their standard paperwork. Maybe they don't care but their investors don't like it. Maybe it's a big company and the hiring manager doesn't want to deal with the bureaucracy of the legal department. Maybe they just really really don't want you working for a competitor. In any case, sometimes it's not worth fighting over. I once interned as a software engineer for a wristwatch manufacturer who made me sign a non-compete. The chances of me starting a wristwatch company or working for a direct competitor were close to zero. If that's the case for you, then weigh the risks involved, but you might decide that it's worth it to sign anyway.

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#63

So recently I came across an Invention Disclosure agreement that a company wanted me to sign. The phrasing of this kind of threw me off: "I will promptly communicate to the Company each and every invention, discovery or item of intellectual property made or conceived by me, either as an individual or jointly with others, during my period of employment, and I agree that any such invention, discovery or item of intelle…

You have got to be fucking kidding me. That’s insane. I’d never sign such a statement. That’s far worse to me than a non-compete, especially as someone who is always working/playing on my own time with various ideas. There are no boundaries for work time vs personal time, and it even tries to take ownership of other people’s work. Fuck that. I would absolutely laugh in the face of anyone who asked me to sign such a statement.

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#64

How can I politely say "no way" while still getting the job?

In my experience the problem is that these clauses are traditionally presented to you by a non-technical employee typically from HR, and (in my anecdotal experience) these employees usually try to dismiss your concerns with a "oh it's just a formality" or "all companies make you sign this sort of thing!"... so if you're not important enough to talk to someone higher up, you might just get your offer revoked if you tr…

-Agreed that the clauses are most often presented by someone not authorized to waive them.

However, I've found on the couple of occasions where (non-reasonable) NCAs were presented to me that simply claiming that the terms as stated are not acceptable and that a revised NCA must be prepared if I am to sign it results in a shrug and a 'Whatever. We'll just skip it, then.'

Now, if they'd stood their ground, I'd have had to look elsewhere. (I am not a big fish - just a lowly engineer who do some management on the side - so they didn't waive the NCA for REALLY wanting me to come aboard; more from reluctance to go through all the hassles of either doing another hiring process OR amending the NCA.)

(At a former employer, the NCA basically stated that anything I ever thought of, be it at work or after work, in my field of expertise or in whatever unrelated field, belonged to them. Oh, and this obligation extended past the termination of employment for a period of time decided at their discretion. Not enforceable in the least, but still...)

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#65

The problem I have with non-competes, is that I've always been given them as I'm filling out paperwork. So my options are: Say no to the job that I've just quit my last job and moved two states away for, or sign it.

yeah, which technically makes the non-compete invalid. They can't change the terms of your contract after you've already accepted the position.

What they're hoping for, is that you'll just bow down and take it, rather than pursue any other option, because you actually do want the job.

The next problem you run into, is if you do sign it, and then don't immediately start looking for another position, then they could argue back that you accepted the new terms of the agreement. In order to push the case that the non-compete is invalid, you have to immediately begin taking action in accordance with the idea that the non-compete is a deal-breaking change of your employment contract for you. If you continue working at the job for another 2 years, for example, you likely won't be able to convincingly make that case.

If you do leave the position, you likely have a case on your hands. In the event that they try to use the non-compete against you, you could claim the offer was invalid, because of the misrepresentation of your employment conditions, something you attempted to fix immediately upon starting the job (by attempting to leave again). This has been successfully argued in court before.

You may even be able to argue for damages, particularly if you moved across country, like you imply. It is grossly illegal for an employer to, for example, change your pay rate right after starting a new job, so you might be able to argue the same for an unexpected non-compete.

But obviously, I am not a lawyer. Everything I just said could be wrong, and you'd be crazy not to talk everything above through with one during the entire process.

But that's the general gist of how these things work.

Any company that does this is a very scummy company. Or they're just unorganized, and didn't think to send you all the paperwork before you started. I like chadash's suggestions above a lot.

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#66
post #49
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By that point, the paperwork is complete. The hiring completes the transaction as being satisfactory to both sides.

That's not generally how it works. Modifying a contract without being clear that you are making a counter offer isn't going to hold up in court. They are going to see the company's offer, your acceptance, and then hold you to the original company offer.

Fwiw, I'd say at least half of the clauses I've been asked to sign were not included at contract time, but rather at post-contract "do HR paperwork" time.

So I don't see how that could be construed to be 'part of the original offer'.

Especially if you asked (in writing) if such a clause existed and received a negative / no response before signing the contract.

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#67

So recently I came across an Invention Disclosure agreement that a company wanted me to sign. The phrasing of this kind of threw me off: "I will promptly communicate to the Company each and every invention, discovery or item of intellectual property made or conceived by me, either as an individual or jointly with others, during my period of employment, and I agree that any such invention, discovery or item of intelle…

The first part is stock boiler plate, one year after you leave? That is interesting. Most companies simply don’t care, save for inventions directly in their field. I would think this would typically result in a contract dispute with your new employer, not with you so much. The new employer is going to claim your inventions, file various patents and such, then the old one tries to wave your employment contract around…

Is the first part really that common? If it were for say a web dev role and I make electronics in my spare time, wouldn't this give the company my electronics hobbies/products?

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#68
This is just one of those things which looks evil from 'Employee' perspective but important enough from 'Employer' Perspective. You have to also look at the how these clauses found their way into these contracts.

Certain professions; Legal/Software/IT Services/Accounting; make it very easy for one or group of employees, to just take a company's current clients, offer them a low price, and start a new firm thereby causing losses for the original service company. Business which got burnt by their employees starting competitive business thereby started adding these clauses into their agreements.

Sometimes competitors itself would poach key employee which is working for a Client X thereby gaining an edge and thats why the clause for 'Client'.

It's much easier for a Company to let a potential employee go then position themselves to a losing client situation.

Also Most software engineers when they leave the company take backup of not only the entire code they've written but also the entire code for the project they've been working on. Thats why the IP Protection clause.

Again, your blog content would be different if you stopped being a Computer Scientist and started your own Company.

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#69
post #57
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(IANAL) Not signing the contract is one thing. Misrepresenting your position is something else. If you gave the impression that you agreed to the terms provided, then it's possible you could be held to those terms. A contract isn't defined by a signature. A contract is defined by a "meeting of the minds." The signature is commonly-accepted evidence that such a thing occurred, but it's not essential. By pocketing the…

Unethical? It seems ethically equal to a company using their bargaining position to advantage themselves and disadvantage their prospective employees.

> It seems ethically equal to a company using their bargaining position to advantage themselves and disadvantage their prospective employees.

You must be unfamiliar with the software development market. In which way do employers have massive market power which renders prospective employees vulnerable?

If anything, it seems like developers have the upper hand (perhaps with the exclusion of game developers).

Re: Why I Don't Sign Non-Competes

#70

So recently I came across an Invention Disclosure agreement that a company wanted me to sign. The phrasing of this kind of threw me off: "I will promptly communicate to the Company each and every invention, discovery or item of intellectual property made or conceived by me, either as an individual or jointly with others, during my period of employment, and I agree that any such invention, discovery or item of intelle…

I've signed one once that had a clause where everything I made for a year after the job ended I had to approach them with it and give them a chance to offer me money for it (right of first refusal), but never anything where they automatically own it post employment. They did have a 'we own pretty much every thought you have while you work here' clause, though, because it was a game studio and the owner's reasoning wa…

I never believe excuses like that. They can just as easily write "we own any game ideas you come up with while you work here" instead of "every thought".

There's no reason to ask for what you don't need and never intend to enforce. Unless you intend to selectively enforce it, in which case I'll assume you'll select me to do so one day.

Post reply on HN