3 ms·

Nonsense. OP needs to get a lawyer. There's no harm in letting them know they've retained one -- most savvy employees have. On the other hand, the risk vector h

Nonsense. OP needs to get a lawyer. There's no harm in letting them know they've retained one -- most savvy employees have. On the other hand, the risk vector here is from the employee already making the cardinal mistake of working on something during off hours that directly competes with employer's line of business. That's where the battle is likely already lost, unless they live in a state like CA where noncompetes are closer to unenforceable.

tyingq 7y ago
"Nonsense" Pretty aggressive opener. Is that really necessary? "There's no harm in letting them know they've retained one" It will, for sure, trigger an internal discussion, and maybe some defensive moves like trolling logs or making a copy of his work PC drive. For example, what do you suppose the chances are that the OP navigated to his GitHub repo from a work PC? How is advising caution in this situation "nonsense"? I would weigh the consequences of telling them I had a lawyer, and evaluate anything else I should probably do before telling them.
- yowlingcat 7y ago
  The only thing that's aggressive about that as an opener is if someone specifically takes offense at the suggestion of legal counsel as something you should always have if you can afford it. That's absurd. It is absolutely poor judgment to enter employment without it. If you don't have legal counsel and end up in this situation: 1) You should have had counsel earlier when you signed your agreement. You could have gone through your contract before you signed it, and potentially have gotten revisions. If you didn't get revisions, you could at least correctly understand the boundaries of legal restrictions you're agreeing to. 2) You definitely need counsel now. The situation is going to force you to make a high stakes decision. Even if you can't change the situation, you can at least learn from it.
  - tyingq 7y ago
    Your responses read like I said "you never need a lawyer". I was suggesting caution before telling your employer you retained one, for this specific situation. I think you are mixing me up with someone else. Also, replying to someone with your opening word as "Nonsense" isn't constructive.

tyingq 7y ago

"Nonsense" Pretty aggressive opener. Is that really necessary? "There's no harm in letting them know they've retained one" It will, for sure, trigger an internal discussion, and maybe some defensive moves like trolling logs or making a copy of his work PC drive. For example, what do you suppose the chances are that the OP navigated to his GitHub repo from a work PC? How is advising caution in this situation "nonsense"? I would weigh the consequences of telling them I had a lawyer, and evaluate anything else I should probably do before telling them.

yowlingcat 7y ago
The only thing that's aggressive about that as an opener is if someone specifically takes offense at the suggestion of legal counsel as something you should always have if you can afford it. That's absurd. It is absolutely poor judgment to enter employment without it. If you don't have legal counsel and end up in this situation: 1) You should have had counsel earlier when you signed your agreement. You could have gone through your contract before you signed it, and potentially have gotten revisions. If you didn't get revisions, you could at least correctly understand the boundaries of legal restrictions you're agreeing to. 2) You definitely need counsel now. The situation is going to force you to make a high stakes decision. Even if you can't change the situation, you can at least learn from it.
- tyingq 7y ago
  Your responses read like I said "you never need a lawyer". I was suggesting caution before telling your employer you retained one, for this specific situation. I think you are mixing me up with someone else. Also, replying to someone with your opening word as "Nonsense" isn't constructive.