4 ms·

Non compete is fine if you were paid full salary for the entire time.

• masklinn 10y ago
  For the entire extent of the non-compete or for the entire time of your job? If it's the former then maybe (Germany requires at least 50% gross for the extent of the non-compete, and it can still be struck down by courts if it unreasonably hampers the former employee's ability to find a new job)
• Silhouette 10y ago
  Which full salary, the one you got before, or the one you could make as a skilled software developer moving to a much better gig with a rival employer willing to offer a more attractive deal?
  • elcct 10y ago
    This is a good question. I think if you were offered better salary, the former company should either match it or let you take new contract.
    • michaelmrose 10y ago
      This is sensible but its a lot easier just to make non competes go away entirely.
      • elcct 10y ago
        In the end if there is no compete clause in your contract, you can just not take it...
        • abjorn 10y ago
          That might be okay for a software engineer who can likely find a different offer somewhere else without much trouble, but that's not going to be realistic for everybody.
        • RIMR 10y ago
          That is a good strategy, but it will just cause unemployment to rise. Though, I wouldn't mind keeping my own "non-termination agreement" on hand so that if I am asked to sign a non-compete, I can ask them to sign my contract too. After all, if they think it's fair that I shouldn't be able to work for another company doing the same thing, it should be equally fair that they can't replace me with another worker doing the same thing. So yeah, I'll sign your non-compete, so long as you agree that you cannot terminate me without invalidating it.
    • Silhouette 10y ago
      So now what happens when a competing firm starts "offering" artificially high salaries just to force the current employer's costs up?
      • tremon 10y ago
        Some workers will switch to the competing firm, causing pay disparity within that firm, which in turn might cause decreased worker productivity or brain drain.
  • TeMPOraL 10y ago
    Depends. I'll happily take my old salary for just sitting on my butt and not doing anything. Of course, I would not be sitting like that - I'd probably take a part-time job somewhere else, and spend the rest of the time educating myself (for my field as well as for other things). Non-competes don't cover reading books.
    • kefka 10y ago
      That, or go back to school on their dime. Then you make yourself that much more wanted.
    • cableshaft 10y ago
      Or you could develop some software in your spare time for your own use that you could repurpose for commercial sale and release once the non-compete has lapsed.
  • ams6110 10y ago
    Are you more attractive to the new employer because of the training and education that your current employer has provided?
    • Silhouette 10y ago
      In my entire career (as a professional software developer) I'm pretty sure every employer I ever worked for gained far more from my own personal development off the clock than they ever gained from any training they provided, not least because the main "training" most of them provided was simply a chance to use my skills and develop my experience. I therefore find the whole idea that an employer is somehow nurturing and developing someone in our profession and so should be entitled to everything that person ever does, even off the clock and even into the future, a bit bizarre. Even if it weren't, employers aren't hiring machines, they're hiring human beings. If they've become so greedy that they have forgotten that, I see no reason our laws shouldn't compel them to treat their employees (and past employees) properly.