3 ms·

Agreed, but how is that different from what the person you replied to said? I assume they can't pay someone for their silence against their will. Or maybe I'm w

• MiddleEndian 4y ago
  If non-competes are enforceable by the German style listed above, the employee forced silent by the non-compete, even after they are done working, but the company is also forced to pay them. However, in that case, the company has two options: Forced non-compete with whatever percentage of salary is forced by law, or don't do a non-compete at all. While the employee has only one option: Whatever the employer chooses. Similar to most of the US (barring a few states) except US employees don't even get compensated. Meanwhile, if employees aren't forced to accept non-competes, the employee and employer can work out a deal or not. Given that as far as I know, California employers don't regularly pay people their TC not to work after they quit, it seems that non-competes are more of a threat against employees than something actually necessary to prevent trade secrets or whatever. Although even outside of California, I don't know anyone personally who had a non-compete enforced after quitting a job (unless this happened and they didn't tell me).