3 ms·
You are right that this is state dependent, and I am certainly not a lawyer. I have no direct knowledge about WI. My personal experience concerns NJ/NY. Still,
by toth 3y ago
You are right that this is state dependent, and I am certainly not a lawyer.
I have no direct knowledge about WI. My personal experience concerns NJ/NY.
Still, what I understood at the time is that, if the employer is not paying you at all during non-compete period, they will have a hard time enforcing it anywhere.
I am also surprised by the claim that it could cost millions to litigate about something like this, how confident are you of that number?
(And about CA, my understanding was that noncompetes are simply to allowed there, so it wouldn't even apply)
- eschaton 3y agoI’m fairly confident that at least certain employers who have deep pockets and are obsessed with non-competes (like that EMR) company would spend many, many times someone’s annual salary to ruin them for daring to try to work in an even tangentially similar industry (such as wearable health hardware) before their non-compete expires. That specific company is delusional about where their profit comes from; they (specifically their founder/CEO and the surrounding execs) think it’s because of their awesome “ultra secret” technology and not a combination of regulatory and inertial lock-in. Like, they literally think their MUMPS codebase and the non-relational database backing it are what make them great, rather than something they’re successful in spite of. (And it does, to the degree that it encodes a huge amount of domain knowledge—derivative domain knowledge, based on the law, regulation, and insurance policies…)