3 ms·
> a noncopete is valid only if you're being financially compensated by some amount while the noncompete lasts. And this is about the only way they hold up in c
by LeonM 4y ago
> a noncopete is valid only if you're being financially compensated by some amount while the noncompete lasts.
And this is about the only way they hold up in court, otherwise the non-compete would be a one-sided contract.
IANAL, but I was once sued by a former employer over a non-compete (an entry level IT job). The judge basically swept the floor with it.
Also, it made me understand why severance packages exist, it is usually a salary compensation for the non-compete duration. Now when you hear outrage over some bank exec getting a million dollar severance, know that this can be because of a non-compete.
- hn_throwaway_99 4y ago> Now when you hear outrage over some bank exec getting a million dollar severance, know that this can be because of a non-compete. But, as you pointed out with your story, much of the outrage is still directed at the rank hypocrisy that goes on - companies easily try to force noncompetes with little or no compensation to low level workers, but then automatically know they need to pay execs millions for the same privilege.
- xen2xen1 4y agoThe only time I've ever heard of a noncompete being enforced was when an IT worker bid against his employer on a contract renewal he was working on, and won. His newly former employer had sued him and won, and made him unhappy for a long time via the courts. Some things like noncompetes really exist for the worst case scenario, but is threatened in all cases.
- pvarangot 4y ago> And this is about the only way they hold up in court I think if your company gets bought and you get stock compensation of the company buying it, both as a founder or an employee, they can also make it hold in court.