3 ms·

> "You do what I tell you or else" is pretty far from that. The "or else" here is you walk away and seek out an agreement with someone else. You're not forced

> "You do what I tell you or else" is pretty far from that. The "or else" here is you walk away and seek out an agreement with someone else. You're not forced to sign a contract just because it's not negotiable. > Those are definitely unethical, and contrary to free markets. I don't think it's unethical or exploitative to pay someone $500k to sit on a beach and relax for a year. Many non-competes are also industry specific, so you can even double dip and get a job while collecting your gardening leave payout as long as it's not within the same subfield you used to work in. You can argue that certain low-wage, low-skill employees need a paycheck every two weeks or starve, and these people have zero leverage or ability to walk away from a punitive contract, but highly paid tech workers don't fall into this category. There are plenty of options out there for you if you don't want to sign a noncompete. Some people like the idea of getting paid a bunch of money to not work, just because you don't like noncompetes doesn't mean you are entitled to force your personal preferences on other people against their will by outlawing such agreements. Sometimes non-competes are so lucrative that employees sue their own employers to force them to uphold them even when the employers don't want to. https://www.natlawreview.com/article/employer-s-waiver-non-compete-period-order-to-avoid-1-million-payment-held https://www.natlawreview.com/article/employer-s-waiver-non-c... Does that sound like exploitation to you?

voxl 6y ago
You're arguing against a straw man. The original poster was clear enough: negotiate the contract, if the company won't budge then don't sign. That is your leverage. There is a question about whether or not the contract is ethical, but that's irrelevant to the original point. Which is simply this: contracts should be negotiable. If they're not, use your leverage. ALL contracts are negotiable, it's just a matter of which parts. Your salary is part of the contract, and everyone should be negotiating that.
- esoterica 6y ago
  > You're arguing against a straw man. The original poster was clear enough: negotiate the contract, if the company won't budge then don't sign. Where did I say that you're not entitled to refuse to deal with companies that won't negotiate with you? Of course you're free to walk away if you the company doesn't want to negotiate with you, but the company isn't doing anything wrong by not wanting to negotiate and there is no legal or moral requirement for them to negotiate. > contracts should be negotiable Disagree. Contracts can be whatever the entity who draws them up wants them to be. If you don't like it don't sign it.
  - smichel17 6y ago
    Non-negotiable contacts are totally fine and legal. They are called adhesion contracts. Not everything that is enforceable in a negotiated contact is enforceable in a contract of adhesion.
- johnrgrace 6y ago
  Exactly this was what ended my career with Amazon. I was asked after being there five years to sign a non compete with no consideration.
alistairSH 6y ago
I don't think it's unethical or exploitative to pay someone $500k to sit on a beach and relax for a year. Generally, that's not how non-competes work in the US. They are typically unpaid. WA just changed their laws. CA mostly outlaws them all together. Most other states allow them. You're also possibly arguing for a position of higher power as an employee than is typical. Most employees don't have the luxury of forgoing offers based on contract language that HR promises won't be enforced (until it is).
- NotSammyHagar 6y ago
  All the regular tech company noncompetes i've seen don't pay you if they come into play. amazon's still applies even if they fire you.
wpietri 6y ago
You are taking a very small percentage of noncompetes, the ones where people get paid well for doing nothing, and acting like that's the common case. The sit-on-a-beach ones are negotiated by people with very high leverage. I've never heard of a friend in tech getting one; the only people I know personally who have gotten them are finance quants with PhDs and long track records. You conveniently omit what I'm referring to above with "those", which is not the four-leaf-clover, sit-on-a-beach contracts. It's the rest, which involve no pay and foreclosed employment options. Those are indeed unethical (in that they exploit power to create negative-sum outcomes) and contrary to free markets (in that they reduce both supply and demand to advantage a powerful market player).

voxl 6y ago

You're arguing against a straw man. The original poster was clear enough: negotiate the contract, if the company won't budge then don't sign. That is your leverage. There is a question about whether or not the contract is ethical, but that's irrelevant to the original point. Which is simply this: contracts should be negotiable. If they're not, use your leverage. ALL contracts are negotiable, it's just a matter of which parts. Your salary is part of the contract, and everyone should be negotiating that.

esoterica 6y ago
> You're arguing against a straw man. The original poster was clear enough: negotiate the contract, if the company won't budge then don't sign. Where did I say that you're not entitled to refuse to deal with companies that won't negotiate with you? Of course you're free to walk away if you the company doesn't want to negotiate with you, but the company isn't doing anything wrong by not wanting to negotiate and there is no legal or moral requirement for them to negotiate. > contracts should be negotiable Disagree. Contracts can be whatever the entity who draws them up wants them to be. If you don't like it don't sign it.
- smichel17 6y ago
  Non-negotiable contacts are totally fine and legal. They are called adhesion contracts. Not everything that is enforceable in a negotiated contact is enforceable in a contract of adhesion.
johnrgrace 6y ago
Exactly this was what ended my career with Amazon. I was asked after being there five years to sign a non compete with no consideration.

alistairSH 6y ago

I don't think it's unethical or exploitative to pay someone $500k to sit on a beach and relax for a year. Generally, that's not how non-competes work in the US. They are typically unpaid. WA just changed their laws. CA mostly outlaws them all together. Most other states allow them. You're also possibly arguing for a position of higher power as an employee than is typical. Most employees don't have the luxury of forgoing offers based on contract language that HR promises won't be enforced (until it is).

NotSammyHagar 6y ago
All the regular tech company noncompetes i've seen don't pay you if they come into play. amazon's still applies even if they fire you.

wpietri 6y ago

You are taking a very small percentage of noncompetes, the ones where people get paid well for doing nothing, and acting like that's the common case. The sit-on-a-beach ones are negotiated by people with very high leverage. I've never heard of a friend in tech getting one; the only people I know personally who have gotten them are finance quants with PhDs and long track records. You conveniently omit what I'm referring to above with "those", which is not the four-leaf-clover, sit-on-a-beach contracts. It's the rest, which involve no pay and foreclosed employment options. Those are indeed unethical (in that they exploit power to create negative-sum outcomes) and contrary to free markets (in that they reduce both supply and demand to advantage a powerful market player).