5 ms·

I've had non competes at my last 3 jobs (all in web hosting) The first, a darling "startup" adored by investors and customers alike sued me twice, sent a proce

I've had non competes at my last 3 jobs (all in web hosting) The first, a darling "startup" adored by investors and customers alike sued me twice, sent a process server to my door at 6am on a saturday and tried to call me in for a deposition the afternoon of Christmas eve. They regularly win company culture awards and receive undeserved praise for being a place people can grow. I had a chance to grow from IC to VP and they did everything they could legally do to stop me. The second, a publicly traded hosting company that has battled negative public perception for years had an EVP handle it wherein he basically said "sounds like you are leaving for a great opportunity. We wish you and your family well and you'll always be 'one of us.'" The third company voluntarily and without my asking remover the non compete from my separation paperwork. Non competes are a disaster and always will be. But how companies enforce them is the real culprit.

georgeecollins 8y ago
So ban them, at least in most cases. That's what we do in California.
quickthrower2 8y ago
What does the process server say? They are so glamorized in TV shows, lime Suits where they deliver a Chinese takeaway!
- goatherders 8y ago
  He said "I'm sorry, I know this is disruptive" as my two small children cried behind me, unsure why someone had banged on the door so early in the morning.
- dfxm12 8y ago
  As someone who did this for a few years, I can tell you it's all very ho hum, and not once did I need to pretend I was delivering Chinese food.
kough 8y ago
I'm glad that you had a good experience with GoDaddy; I also used to work there, I think they've done a really good job of turning the culture around and making the place better.
- goatherders 8y ago
  It's a wonderful place to work.
StavrosK 8y ago
Why not name and shame? I agree that you fear retaliation from another company thinking "what if he blows the whistle on us at some point?" and not hiring you, but I don't know, is that a company you'd like to work for in the first place?
dfxm12 8y ago
But how companies enforce them is the real culprit. This is a failure of our legal system. You can challenge a non compete in court and, depending on a few factors most heavily weighted towards if you can afford a good lawyer, you have a real shot at a win. However, this means you and only you are free from the shackles of this non compete. Other people who signed a contract with this same exact illegal clause in it are still beholden to it, unless they have the resources to fight it (legal knowledge, time for a court battle, money to pay for lawyers). The threat of a lawsuit is enough to dissuade most people, who lack these resources, to back down from a winnable case.
- goatherders 8y ago
  I actually negotiated this in when I left company 1 for company 2. The language said company two would pay (pay, not reimburse) my legal fees as well as compensate me in the event a TRO was filed (and it was) keeping me from starting my official job.
balabaster 8y ago
I don't get why people sign contracts that have broad non-competes in the language. I always have and always will scrub those out of a contract before I even contemplate signing it. No company that thinks it's okay to prevent me working is a company I want to work for. If they want me badly enough, they'll agree to a fair and balanced contract and that includes removal of any contract that seeks to infringe on my ability to fairly support my family. I have NEVER had a company balk at this when I do it. I tell them exactly why I'm removing it and why I will never agree to a contract that includes it. I've never had any company bat an eyelid at this. They've all thought my reasons were perfectly fair and valid.
- jjeaff 8y ago
  There are places for noncompetes. And that is only when you are dealing with very, very high compensation. If you are paying someone enough money that they could live on for the rest of their life comfortably, then you can reasonably expect them to sign a non-compete. But don't have the gall to expect someone to sign a non-compete for a market wage.
  - balabaster 8y ago
    But even a non-compete for a sufficiently high compensation needs to be sufficiently limited that it only prevents infringement of company specific intellectual property. You couldn't reasonably expect me as VP of a specific type of eCommerce company to not jump ship and go be the VP of a different type of eCommerce company. For example: Would it be fair to prevent the CTO/CIO of Google jumping ship and going to be CTO/CIO of for argument's sake Facebook? Both of these companies are technology companies in the advertising space, both have hugely different approaches and business models for their revenue streams. Given the language of some of the non-compete clauses I routinely scrub out of contracts, a VP would be expected to sign away their right to be able to leave and still find a meaningful job in their field while there being little, if any, risk of damage to Google by this switch - I mean, aside from having to replace their CTO/CIO. Would it be fair for me to jump ship from say Bluejeans knowing all their trade secrets that give them their edge in their specific market and running off to Skype and taking all that knowledge and putting up a product that directly takes business from Bluejeans? Well, probably not. I would say a non-compete for companies that could be considered direct competitors is absolutely fair. Disclaimer: I picked arbitrary company names out of the air, I'm not meaning to insinuate these companies have any such language in their contracts.
cerberusss 8y ago
> I've had non competes at my last 3 jobs Wouldn't it be more precise to say: "I've signed non competes" instead of having them?

georgeecollins 8y ago

So ban them, at least in most cases. That's what we do in California.

quickthrower2 8y ago

What does the process server say? They are so glamorized in TV shows, lime Suits where they deliver a Chinese takeaway!

goatherders 8y ago
He said "I'm sorry, I know this is disruptive" as my two small children cried behind me, unsure why someone had banged on the door so early in the morning.
dfxm12 8y ago
As someone who did this for a few years, I can tell you it's all very ho hum, and not once did I need to pretend I was delivering Chinese food.

kough 8y ago

I'm glad that you had a good experience with GoDaddy; I also used to work there, I think they've done a really good job of turning the culture around and making the place better.

goatherders 8y ago
It's a wonderful place to work.

StavrosK 8y ago

Why not name and shame? I agree that you fear retaliation from another company thinking "what if he blows the whistle on us at some point?" and not hiring you, but I don't know, is that a company you'd like to work for in the first place?

dfxm12 8y ago

But how companies enforce them is the real culprit. This is a failure of our legal system. You can challenge a non compete in court and, depending on a few factors most heavily weighted towards if you can afford a good lawyer, you have a real shot at a win. However, this means you and only you are free from the shackles of this non compete. Other people who signed a contract with this same exact illegal clause in it are still beholden to it, unless they have the resources to fight it (legal knowledge, time for a court battle, money to pay for lawyers). The threat of a lawsuit is enough to dissuade most people, who lack these resources, to back down from a winnable case.

goatherders 8y ago
I actually negotiated this in when I left company 1 for company 2. The language said company two would pay (pay, not reimburse) my legal fees as well as compensate me in the event a TRO was filed (and it was) keeping me from starting my official job.

balabaster 8y ago

I don't get why people sign contracts that have broad non-competes in the language. I always have and always will scrub those out of a contract before I even contemplate signing it. No company that thinks it's okay to prevent me working is a company I want to work for. If they want me badly enough, they'll agree to a fair and balanced contract and that includes removal of any contract that seeks to infringe on my ability to fairly support my family. I have NEVER had a company balk at this when I do it. I tell them exactly why I'm removing it and why I will never agree to a contract that includes it. I've never had any company bat an eyelid at this. They've all thought my reasons were perfectly fair and valid.

jjeaff 8y ago
There are places for noncompetes. And that is only when you are dealing with very, very high compensation. If you are paying someone enough money that they could live on for the rest of their life comfortably, then you can reasonably expect them to sign a non-compete. But don't have the gall to expect someone to sign a non-compete for a market wage.
- balabaster 8y ago
  But even a non-compete for a sufficiently high compensation needs to be sufficiently limited that it only prevents infringement of company specific intellectual property. You couldn't reasonably expect me as VP of a specific type of eCommerce company to not jump ship and go be the VP of a different type of eCommerce company. For example: Would it be fair to prevent the CTO/CIO of Google jumping ship and going to be CTO/CIO of for argument's sake Facebook? Both of these companies are technology companies in the advertising space, both have hugely different approaches and business models for their revenue streams. Given the language of some of the non-compete clauses I routinely scrub out of contracts, a VP would be expected to sign away their right to be able to leave and still find a meaningful job in their field while there being little, if any, risk of damage to Google by this switch - I mean, aside from having to replace their CTO/CIO. Would it be fair for me to jump ship from say Bluejeans knowing all their trade secrets that give them their edge in their specific market and running off to Skype and taking all that knowledge and putting up a product that directly takes business from Bluejeans? Well, probably not. I would say a non-compete for companies that could be considered direct competitors is absolutely fair. Disclaimer: I picked arbitrary company names out of the air, I'm not meaning to insinuate these companies have any such language in their contracts.

cerberusss 8y ago

> I've had non competes at my last 3 jobs Wouldn't it be more precise to say: "I've signed non competes" instead of having them?