5 ms·

The end of non-compete agreements is a tech job earthquake

21 points by CrankyBear 3y ago

cranberryturkey 3y ago
Not here, they've been illegal in California as long as I can remember. An employer can't keep you from pursuing work at a competitor ruining your livelihood.
- closeparen 3y ago
  But you will pay potentially more of a premium for living in California than you could get by switching jobs elsewhere. Now you can have both job mobility and normal cost of living.
  - cranberryturkey 3y ago
    is an non-compete clause really a reason not to live somewhere?
    - HeyLaughingBoy 3y ago
      If you're planning on joining a business to learn the field, then leaving to start your own company in the same domain, then yes, it certainly could be.
    - closeparen 3y ago
      There might be some circumstances where working under a non-compete is acceptable (well compensated garden leave, very narrow domain you're not that married to, old-school firm culture with expectation of lifetime employment) but overall I think it'd be pretty crazy to try to have a tech career anywhere except California under current law. If you get laid off you're effectively prohibited from earning any income related to your skills for 2+ years.
- phendrenad2 3y ago
  Some other states, too. Making this a law nationally will help other states catch up in the tech sector.
  - nathanaldensr 3y ago
    Nit: It's not a law but a regulation.
rco8786 3y ago
> Once it hits, all existing non-compete agreements will be nullified, except for those applying to executives in “policy-making positions” who make at least $151,164 a year. Anyone have insight into why that particular number was chosen?
- madcaptenor 3y ago
  My guess is that it's some multiple of the average wage, or some threshold from previous legislation (maybe SEC?) that started out as a round number but has been adjusted for inflation. But I can't find references to it anywhere outside of law firms' hastily written SEO pages.
- madcaptenor 3y ago
  On further research: It's the Department of Labor's definition of "highly compensated employee" (https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/overtime/rulemaking/faqs https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/overtime/rulemaking/faqs), which is the "annualized weekly earnings of the 85th percentile of full-time salaried workers nationally". Not sure why they pick the 85th percentile specifically but it feels like a less arbitrary number.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
jauntywundrkind 3y ago
I had a colleague talking this up for AAA gaming today. I'm not convinced but also, fuck yeah, happy to hope for better. By far the worse scariest shittiest part of our unchecked lobbyist-lead capitalism is consolidation, is less and less options being out there. Healthy capitalism requires competition, but the big keep eating the young, and the Zeus titanomancy versus the elders opportunities keep happening less and less.

21 points by CrankyBear 3y ago

Not here, they've been illegal in California as long as I can remember. An employer can't keep you from pursuing work at a competitor ruining your livelihood.

closeparen 3y ago
But you will pay potentially more of a premium for living in California than you could get by switching jobs elsewhere. Now you can have both job mobility and normal cost of living.
- cranberryturkey 3y ago
  is an non-compete clause really a reason not to live somewhere?
  - HeyLaughingBoy 3y ago
    If you're planning on joining a business to learn the field, then leaving to start your own company in the same domain, then yes, it certainly could be.
  - closeparen 3y ago
    There might be some circumstances where working under a non-compete is acceptable (well compensated garden leave, very narrow domain you're not that married to, old-school firm culture with expectation of lifetime employment) but overall I think it'd be pretty crazy to try to have a tech career anywhere except California under current law. If you get laid off you're effectively prohibited from earning any income related to your skills for 2+ years.
phendrenad2 3y ago
Some other states, too. Making this a law nationally will help other states catch up in the tech sector.
- nathanaldensr 3y ago
  Nit: It's not a law but a regulation.

rco8786 3y ago

> Once it hits, all existing non-compete agreements will be nullified, except for those applying to executives in “policy-making positions” who make at least $151,164 a year. Anyone have insight into why that particular number was chosen?

madcaptenor 3y ago
My guess is that it's some multiple of the average wage, or some threshold from previous legislation (maybe SEC?) that started out as a round number but has been adjusted for inflation. But I can't find references to it anywhere outside of law firms' hastily written SEO pages.
madcaptenor 3y ago
On further research: It's the Department of Labor's definition of "highly compensated employee" (https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/overtime/rulemaking/faqs https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/overtime/rulemaking/faqs), which is the "annualized weekly earnings of the 85th percentile of full-time salaried workers nationally". Not sure why they pick the 85th percentile specifically but it feels like a less arbitrary number.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

jauntywundrkind 3y ago

I had a colleague talking this up for AAA gaming today. I'm not convinced but also, fuck yeah, happy to hope for better. By far the worse scariest shittiest part of our unchecked lobbyist-lead capitalism is consolidation, is less and less options being out there. Healthy capitalism requires competition, but the big keep eating the young, and the Zeus titanomancy versus the elders opportunities keep happening less and less.