5 ms·

Florida is letting companies make it harder for highly paid workers to swap jobs

130 points by pseudolus 1y ago

toomuchtodo 1y ago
https://archive.today/4VN6F https://archive.today/4VN6F
matttproud 1y ago
Coming soon (again) to a Florida near you: Liberty of Contract and Lochner Era jurisprudence.
- toomuchtodo 1y ago
  It's an interesting tug of war, Florida and Texas vs other states. Businesses move there because it's the wild west and low regulation, but their climate costs are accelerating rapidly which is going to lead to what I can only describe as this image from São Paulo: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/nov/29/sao-paulo-injustice-tuca-vieira-inequality-photograph-paraisopolis https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/nov/29/sao-paulo-inj... What happens as these states continue to get squeezed by unfavorable long term economics while these businesses and the wealthy continue their performance art? What happens when it becomes constantly more difficult to attract labor to states where the quality of education is low (assuming workers who have or plan to have kids) and the cost of living continues to go up (insurance, etc). An interesting natural experiment and observations ahead. (Florida resident for the last ~decade, but no longer as of late; US climate costs are approaching ~$1T/year, make good choices)
  - Analemma_ 1y ago
    I've mentioned this before, but once the climate problems in Florida can no longer be handwaved away and Miami is perpetually in a shin-deep layer of water (this already happens after every major rain event, and it will gradually take longer and longer to return to normal, and eventually it will not), Floria will demand and probably get a hundred-billion-dollar engineering megaproject to try and fix the issue on the taxpayer's dime. This will happen because there is too much invested-- both financially in the real estate market, and emotionally in the climate change don't real market-- to walk away.
    - toomuchtodo 1y ago
      Construction (both infrastructure and housing) faces a shortage of low single digit million workers nationally. Now, account for deportations of workers in those industries. Account for 4M Boomers retiring per year. Account for an annual year over year decline in prime working age participation due to declining total fertility rates. Who is going to do this actual megaproject engineering and construction work? Print or borrow all the fiat you want, there aren't enough people for the body of work to be done. Residents of Florida are already waiting months or over a year sometimes to get a roof replaced, because there are not enough workers. South Florida's water supply under threat from saltwater intrusion crisis - https://www.cbsnews.com/miami/news/south-floridas-water-supply-under-threat-from-saltwater-intrusion-crisis/ https://www.cbsnews.com/miami/news/south-floridas-water-supp... - April 24th, 2025 Miami-Dade Saltwater Interface GIS Mapping - https://geoportal.sfwmd.gov/portal/home/item.html?id=128fce320d0549948ac891924b7dc1fb https://geoportal.sfwmd.gov/portal/home/item.html?id=128fce3... ‘The industry is in a crisis:’ Construction worker shortage delaying projects, driving up costs, experts say - https://www.clickorlando.com/news/local/2025/02/24/the-industry-is-in-a-crisis-construction-worker-shortage-delaying-projects-driving-up-costs-experts-say/ https://www.clickorlando.com/news/local/2025/02/24/the-indus... - February 24th, 2025 ("Immigrants account for 31% of all workers in construction trades across the country. In Florida, an estimated 38% of construction workers are foreign-born.") Miami is 'ground zero' for climate risk. People are moving to the area and building there anyway - https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/26/miami-is-ground-zero-for-climate-risk-people-move-there-build-there-anyway.html https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/26/miami-is-ground-zero-for-cli... - April 26th, 2024 ("By 2060, about 60% of Miami-Dade County will be submerged, estimates Harold Wanless, a professor of geography and sustainable development at the University of Miami." ... "The trend shows how many Americans are ultimately willing to overlook environmental risks, even though most acknowledge its presence — a choice that could later devastate them financially.") Climate Costs in 2040: Florida - https://www.climatecosts2040.org/files/state/FL.pdf https://www.climatecosts2040.org/files/state/FL.pdf (9,243 miles of seawall are needed. Florida has the highest cost of building seawalls. 23 Florida counties face at least $1 Billion expenditures. 24 municipalities are up against bills of over $100,000 per person)
      - ryandrake 1y ago
wing-_-nuts 1y ago
Why oh why am I not surprised that the state yet again chooses to side with the corporation over an individual citizen. At least it apparently requires that they pay the person, but bonus and stock are a big part of the comp that's conveniently left off. What bothers me more is being out of work for 4 years would have a pretty bad impact on anyone in tech. It would make it very hard to get another job after so long out of the workforce.
- guywithahat 1y ago
  If it's any consolation, they people on these non-competes keep their salary and benefits, and it only applies to people making significantly above the average salary. That said it's still bad imo
  - jayd16 1y ago
    Twice the average Floridian salary, not average for the role. ie well below what tech workers can make.
    - garciasn 1y ago
      Yeah; as if $140K is a salary which deserves this sort of limitation. $140K is your average Project Management or Senior Analyst role. This is basically every fucking white collar worker. Maybe (and I do NOT believe in NCs) if they were an EXECUTIVE and made >$500K, then, possibly I could see it?
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
bitcurious 1y ago
Seems short-sighted by the investment firms. They aren’t just competing with other Florida firms, they are competing with NYC and London and Hong Kong. Why would top talent move there?
- djfivyvusn 1y ago
  Weather
  - 0cf8612b2e1e 1y ago
    You mean increasingly severe hurricanes?
    - djfivyvusn 1y ago
      Win some lose some.
    - 0xcafefood 1y ago
      Those seem to hit NYC now too. Not as often, but it's also less prepared for them when they do.
    - wil421 1y ago
      I’ll take a chance of a Hurricane every couple decades vs a single season of snow.
      - lupusreal 1y ago
        Personally I'd take 10 feet of snow year round over a single week of Florida's muggy heat. I get that old people like it because they're always cold, but why anybody young lives anywhere in Florida, besides maybe Miami, is completely beyond my comprehension.
        danans 1y ago
        > I get that old people like it because they're always cold, but why anybody young lives anywhere in Florida, besides maybe Miami, is completely beyond my comprehension. To get jobs tending to those (often well-off) old people. It's not for nothing that Florida is a top destination for pharmacy grads.
daft_pink 1y ago
So if you move out of Florida after you leave your job, can you escape the restriction?
- lokar 1y ago
  Yes. I moved from NY to CA, and that made it non-enforceable. But, at least for Eng types with higher TC a bunch of the comp is deferred, and if you breach the agreement you forfeit the money.
  - dhussoe 1y ago
    What do you mean by "deferred" here? I'm a fairly high level IC at a big tech company (high TC), but it's only "deferred" in the sense of more of the TC being in RSUs (over 80%) with less frequent vesting vs. biweekly salary paychecks. But if you leave, you're already forfeiting future vests anyways.
    - lokar 1y ago
      Hedge funds don’t pay in stock. So they often take part of your cash bonus (which is what you would have made in RSU vesting) and put it into the fund. You get it back out in a few years.
  - No1 1y ago
    I’m curious if you consulted with an attorney about that? I’ve heard the opposite from people looking to move from Chicago to CA. Does your former employer have a nexus in CA? Using Florida as an example, if your contract was signed in Florida, your former employer is in Florida, and your case is tried in Florida, the courts aren’t going to pay any regard to California law, and you can be found liable for breach of contract and damages. Correct me if I’m wrong.
    - lokar 1y ago
      The agreements don’t have damages (other than the loss of deferred compensation as I noted). The normal way to use the agreement is to seek injunctive relief. That would have the be in CA, where no judge will allow it. And they did informally confirm they could not prevent me of taking a competitive job, which my employment lawyer confirmed.
onlyrealcuzzo 1y ago
Florida doesn't have that many highly paid workers. They've got a decent amount of rich retired or passive income folks. Aren't they trying to attract high earners from high tax places like NYC? This sounds like a bad idea if you're trying to convince people from NYC to move to FL, which sounds like a bad idea for the businesses it's presumably trying to serve. But what do I know?
- lokar 1y ago
  Citadel and other hedge funds have been moving people there (from NY and Chicago)
  - bobbiechen 1y ago
    Anecdotally, I heard that at these firms, all the "interesting" work is moving to Florida office because of the longer non-compete period. New York and other offices still exist but the most promising proprietary stuff goes to Florida.
    - JackFr 1y ago
      They are moving to Florida because the personal income tax rate in Forida is 0% and in New York it's about 14%.
      - const_cast 1y ago
        As someone living in Texas, which also has no state income tax, it's not this simple. The tax burden is not actually lower, it's just more convoluted. Property taxes, aka wealth taxes, are much higher. These are passed along to consumers, meaning even if you don't have personal wealth you still pay a bit of it.
        red-iron-pine 1y ago
        there have been a few threads here comparing TX to CA and found that CA is still pretty competitive even having a beefy income tax.
hollywood_court 1y ago
Ahh the party of small government strikes again.
- meepmorp 1y ago
  everyone's a minarchist, it's just they disagree on which bits of the state are necessary
  - antonvs 1y ago
    You're either using the term incorrectly, or your overall claim is incorrect. For example, minarchists are not in favor of universal healthcare, by definition - it doesn't fit the short list of the kinds of roles that minarchists believe government should play. There are plenty of people who are in favor of universal healthcare, who can't be called minarchists.
  - Supermancho 1y ago
    Well phrased.
- HamsterDan 1y ago
  This change neither increases nor decreases the size of the government, so it's unclear how you think "party of small government" is relevant here.
  - hydrogen7800 1y ago
    "Size" can be power, not just headcount.
  - const_cast 1y ago
    Colloquially, when people say "large government" they refer to the level and breadth of regulation, aka restrictions on private actors. This restricts private actors, so colloquially we say it made the government larger.
    - 1y ago
codeddesign 1y ago
“They would keep their pay and benefits but wouldn't be entitled to bonuses” This seems like a win for both sides. Employee’s would still be paid for keeping the non-compete.
- black6 1y ago
  That's always been the actual effect of non competes in the US. Slavery was abolished; you can't be told by a former employer that you can't work for someone else unless they continue to pay you not to. That you're being downvoted is telling for the HN crowd who will rally behind "tax the rich" but ignore the call to "help the poor."
codeddesign 1y ago
“They would keep their pay and benefits but wouldn't be entitled to bonuses” I fail to see the issue here. The employee’s would continue to receive pay for up to 4 yrs to keep the non-compete.
- collingreen 1y ago
  Financial industry comp for top earners is mostly bonuses so 4 years of not being able to earn a competitive rate isn't a high cost for the company to prevent you from helping competitors or keeping your skills up to date.
- Avicebron 1y ago
  Yeah I mean it's "scummy" as in you don't control your destiny, but if your guaranteed the pay and benefits for 4 years, and you know that up front when you sign the contract it's sort of like knowing you will get a sabbatical
- orangecat 1y ago
  The downside for employees is that they're not able to keep current and will likely have a harder time finding jobs in the future. The downside for society is that it will cause skilled people to not be producing anything.
- Espressosaurus 1y ago
  High earners get most of their compensation from bonuses, RSUs, etc., none of which will be paid out over the garden leave period. It means whoever employs you in Florida controls your destiny for the 4 years after you leave. If you don't see a problem with that I can only assume you hope you'll be the employer and not the employee.
- OkayPhysicist 1y ago
  Adding friction to changing jobs stifles competition (hey, it's right there in the name), and thus suppresses wages. Employers already have a massive advantage in employment negotiations, so a just society has zero reason to give them more.
0xcafefood 1y ago
Before even opening the article, I speculated that this is related to financial firms eyeing Miami as an alternative location to NYC. And right there at the top "The new law is a big win for Citadel CEO Ken Griffin, who advocated for it." Many hedge funds and trading companies saddle their employees with very stringent non-competes. Citadel Securities moved to Miami recently. "If we want to attract those kinds of clean, high-paying jobs, you have to provide those businesses protection on the investment that they're making and their employees." Why isn't the relatively free job market in Silicon Valley something "East Coast" corporations are looking to emulate? I speculate that there's a major difference in the moat (or lack thereof) between tech firms and financial firms. I can know roughly how Youtube or Instagram work and still not be able to replicate them and take their profits for myself. But knowing which "fishing hole" the guys at Citadel visit might be enough to replicate their strategy. They must not really have a "moat" (outside of the super low latency front running stuff that's really costly to get started).
- lotsofpulp 1y ago
  >Why isn't the relatively free job market in Silicon Valley something "East Coast" corporations are looking to emulate? Because there isn't that much potential profit in finance/trading. As the years go by, more and more is commoditized/automated.
pseudolus 1y ago
Apparently for employers a significant benefit is that it actually requires courts to issue an injunction against the covered employee. The injunction in turn can only be modified or dissolved if the covered employee – or prospective employer – proves by clear and convincing evidence (which must be based on non-confidential information) that: the employee will not perform similar work during the restricted period or use confidential information or customer relationships; the employer failed to pay the salary or benefits required under a covered garden leave agreement, or failed to provide consideration for a non-compete agreement, after the employee provided a “reasonable opportunity” to cure the failure; or the prospective employer is not engaged in (or preparing to engage in) a similar business as the covered employer within the restricted territory.[0] The "clear and convincing standard" (which is an intermediate burden of proof between the standard civil "balance of probabilities" and the strict "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard) coupled with the requirement of providing only non-confidential information to oppose the injunction will likely make this a slam dunk for employers. [0] https://www.fisherphillips.com/en/news-insights/florida-enforcing-non-compete-agreements.html https://www.fisherphillips.com/en/news-insights/florida-enfo...
- oooyay 1y ago
  > the employer failed to pay the salary or benefits required under a covered garden leave agreement, or failed to provide consideration for a non-compete agreement, after the employee provided a “reasonable opportunity” to cure the failure; or Do I understand this correctly - they're expanding non-competes to 4 years and you have to be paid full compensation during that time or the agreement is nullified?
  - pseudolus 1y ago
    That appears to be a correct reading. The issue, apparently, is that you're only paid your base compensation. If a large portion of your total compensation is based on bonuses or equity grants, as is frequently the case in finance and tech, you're out of luck.
    - oooyay 1y ago
stego-tech 1y ago
More Capital lashing against the minor victories of the prior administration for workers. If your business information is so sensitive and valuable that losing an employee could hurt you, then you ought to be compensating that employee well enough that they don’t see the value in taking on the risk of a job hunt.
OkayPhysicist 1y ago
Noncompetes are a scourge. If your company requires them to survive, then it deserves to fail. Any argument in favor of them can be trivially nullified by pointing at California's unrivaled economic success, "despite" (or perhaps in part because of) its complete ban on noncompetes dating back to its founding. Indentured servitude has no place in the modern world.
- echelon 1y ago
  > Noncompetes are a scourge. I can see why small companies might want non-competes to prevent their employees from being poached by hyperscaler monopolies. If non-competes continue to exist, they should be pared down to small-scoped work descriptions only, eg. not "AI" broadly, but rather something like "AI diffusion for skeletal movement". The non-competes shouldn't have durations longer than a year, and the companies enacting the contract should be required to pay departing employees a salary (or some large percentage of a salary) if they want to enforce the non-compete. Non-competes should also only be used to prevent employees from joining larger companies, not smaller ones. And they should never prevent work at a startup or new venture.
  - candiddevmike 1y ago
    If an employee was worth X and the company made them worth Y, they should pay them Y to continue having them as an employee. Anything else distorts the labor market. Now having to pay back training or education if you leave before Z months seems reasonable.
  - ryandrake 1y ago
    I take issue with the idea that I, as an employee, may be "poached". I am not a deer or wild boar, owned by a feudal lord, and protected on his land from hunters. I should be free to have agency and enter into business arrangements with anyone I choose. Just because my company "invested" money into my growth/education/training, doesn't mean they should own me for some period of time while they figure out how to make that investment pay off. Let's stop using this word poached. It's not analogous to an employer/employee relationship.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
gohwell 1y ago
Paid holiday for 1-3 years, what’s wrong with that?
mendyberger 1y ago
Kind of a dumb question, but how does it work if you have a 10 year non-compete in FL but move to another state after 5 years, is the non-compete valid in the other state?
- OkayPhysicist 1y ago
  Generally yes, unless you move to California (which expressly bans noncompetes regardless of where they were signed or where the work was done), in which case it's a "consult a lawyer, but you're probably fine" situation.
kchoudhu 1y ago
The hedge fund effect.
ashoeafoot 1y ago
Ah, the rewards for those of us cosplaying as temporary embarrassed billionaires.
MattGrommes 1y ago
> Miami is the 'future of America' Probably true in that it's on track to be mostly destroyed by climate change and people are injuring themselves looking the other way.
robotnikman 1y ago
How does one become an employee that other companies fight over and try to poach?
mcv 1y ago
While I generally oppose non-competes, > They would keep their pay makes it significantly less bad. I always say that if they want to decide what I can and can't do, they're going to have to pay me. And this is that, so that's definitely something.
AvAn12 1y ago
Total waste of human capital - focused on those with highly-valued skills. What a dumb idea.

130 points by pseudolus 1y ago

toomuchtodo 1y ago

https://archive.today/4VN6F https://archive.today/4VN6F

matttproud 1y ago

Coming soon (again) to a Florida near you: Liberty of Contract and Lochner Era jurisprudence.

toomuchtodo 1y ago
It's an interesting tug of war, Florida and Texas vs other states. Businesses move there because it's the wild west and low regulation, but their climate costs are accelerating rapidly which is going to lead to what I can only describe as this image from São Paulo: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/nov/29/sao-paulo-injustice-tuca-vieira-inequality-photograph-paraisopolis https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/nov/29/sao-paulo-inj... What happens as these states continue to get squeezed by unfavorable long term economics while these businesses and the wealthy continue their performance art? What happens when it becomes constantly more difficult to attract labor to states where the quality of education is low (assuming workers who have or plan to have kids) and the cost of living continues to go up (insurance, etc). An interesting natural experiment and observations ahead. (Florida resident for the last ~decade, but no longer as of late; US climate costs are approaching ~$1T/year, make good choices)
- Analemma_ 1y ago
  I've mentioned this before, but once the climate problems in Florida can no longer be handwaved away and Miami is perpetually in a shin-deep layer of water (this already happens after every major rain event, and it will gradually take longer and longer to return to normal, and eventually it will not), Floria will demand and probably get a hundred-billion-dollar engineering megaproject to try and fix the issue on the taxpayer's dime. This will happen because there is too much invested-- both financially in the real estate market, and emotionally in the climate change don't real market-- to walk away.
  - toomuchtodo 1y ago
    Construction (both infrastructure and housing) faces a shortage of low single digit million workers nationally. Now, account for deportations of workers in those industries. Account for 4M Boomers retiring per year. Account for an annual year over year decline in prime working age participation due to declining total fertility rates. Who is going to do this actual megaproject engineering and construction work? Print or borrow all the fiat you want, there aren't enough people for the body of work to be done. Residents of Florida are already waiting months or over a year sometimes to get a roof replaced, because there are not enough workers. South Florida's water supply under threat from saltwater intrusion crisis - https://www.cbsnews.com/miami/news/south-floridas-water-supply-under-threat-from-saltwater-intrusion-crisis/ https://www.cbsnews.com/miami/news/south-floridas-water-supp... - April 24th, 2025 Miami-Dade Saltwater Interface GIS Mapping - https://geoportal.sfwmd.gov/portal/home/item.html?id=128fce320d0549948ac891924b7dc1fb https://geoportal.sfwmd.gov/portal/home/item.html?id=128fce3... ‘The industry is in a crisis:’ Construction worker shortage delaying projects, driving up costs, experts say - https://www.clickorlando.com/news/local/2025/02/24/the-industry-is-in-a-crisis-construction-worker-shortage-delaying-projects-driving-up-costs-experts-say/ https://www.clickorlando.com/news/local/2025/02/24/the-indus... - February 24th, 2025 ("Immigrants account for 31% of all workers in construction trades across the country. In Florida, an estimated 38% of construction workers are foreign-born.") Miami is 'ground zero' for climate risk. People are moving to the area and building there anyway - https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/26/miami-is-ground-zero-for-climate-risk-people-move-there-build-there-anyway.html https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/26/miami-is-ground-zero-for-cli... - April 26th, 2024 ("By 2060, about 60% of Miami-Dade County will be submerged, estimates Harold Wanless, a professor of geography and sustainable development at the University of Miami." ... "The trend shows how many Americans are ultimately willing to overlook environmental risks, even though most acknowledge its presence — a choice that could later devastate them financially.") Climate Costs in 2040: Florida - https://www.climatecosts2040.org/files/state/FL.pdf https://www.climatecosts2040.org/files/state/FL.pdf (9,243 miles of seawall are needed. Florida has the highest cost of building seawalls. 23 Florida counties face at least $1 Billion expenditures. 24 municipalities are up against bills of over $100,000 per person)
    - ryandrake 1y ago

wing-_-nuts 1y ago

Why oh why am I not surprised that the state yet again chooses to side with the corporation over an individual citizen. At least it apparently requires that they pay the person, but bonus and stock are a big part of the comp that's conveniently left off. What bothers me more is being out of work for 4 years would have a pretty bad impact on anyone in tech. It would make it very hard to get another job after so long out of the workforce.

guywithahat 1y ago
If it's any consolation, they people on these non-competes keep their salary and benefits, and it only applies to people making significantly above the average salary. That said it's still bad imo
- jayd16 1y ago
  Twice the average Floridian salary, not average for the role. ie well below what tech workers can make.
  - garciasn 1y ago
    Yeah; as if $140K is a salary which deserves this sort of limitation. $140K is your average Project Management or Senior Analyst role. This is basically every fucking white collar worker. Maybe (and I do NOT believe in NCs) if they were an EXECUTIVE and made >$500K, then, possibly I could see it?
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]

bitcurious 1y ago

Seems short-sighted by the investment firms. They aren’t just competing with other Florida firms, they are competing with NYC and London and Hong Kong. Why would top talent move there?

djfivyvusn 1y ago
Weather
- 0cf8612b2e1e 1y ago
  You mean increasingly severe hurricanes?
  - djfivyvusn 1y ago
    Win some lose some.
  - 0xcafefood 1y ago
    Those seem to hit NYC now too. Not as often, but it's also less prepared for them when they do.
  - wil421 1y ago
    I’ll take a chance of a Hurricane every couple decades vs a single season of snow.
    - lupusreal 1y ago
      Personally I'd take 10 feet of snow year round over a single week of Florida's muggy heat. I get that old people like it because they're always cold, but why anybody young lives anywhere in Florida, besides maybe Miami, is completely beyond my comprehension.
      - danans 1y ago
        > I get that old people like it because they're always cold, but why anybody young lives anywhere in Florida, besides maybe Miami, is completely beyond my comprehension. To get jobs tending to those (often well-off) old people. It's not for nothing that Florida is a top destination for pharmacy grads.

daft_pink 1y ago

So if you move out of Florida after you leave your job, can you escape the restriction?

lokar 1y ago
Yes. I moved from NY to CA, and that made it non-enforceable. But, at least for Eng types with higher TC a bunch of the comp is deferred, and if you breach the agreement you forfeit the money.
- dhussoe 1y ago
  What do you mean by "deferred" here? I'm a fairly high level IC at a big tech company (high TC), but it's only "deferred" in the sense of more of the TC being in RSUs (over 80%) with less frequent vesting vs. biweekly salary paychecks. But if you leave, you're already forfeiting future vests anyways.
  - lokar 1y ago
    Hedge funds don’t pay in stock. So they often take part of your cash bonus (which is what you would have made in RSU vesting) and put it into the fund. You get it back out in a few years.
- No1 1y ago
  I’m curious if you consulted with an attorney about that? I’ve heard the opposite from people looking to move from Chicago to CA. Does your former employer have a nexus in CA? Using Florida as an example, if your contract was signed in Florida, your former employer is in Florida, and your case is tried in Florida, the courts aren’t going to pay any regard to California law, and you can be found liable for breach of contract and damages. Correct me if I’m wrong.
  - lokar 1y ago
    The agreements don’t have damages (other than the loss of deferred compensation as I noted). The normal way to use the agreement is to seek injunctive relief. That would have the be in CA, where no judge will allow it. And they did informally confirm they could not prevent me of taking a competitive job, which my employment lawyer confirmed.

onlyrealcuzzo 1y ago

Florida doesn't have that many highly paid workers. They've got a decent amount of rich retired or passive income folks. Aren't they trying to attract high earners from high tax places like NYC? This sounds like a bad idea if you're trying to convince people from NYC to move to FL, which sounds like a bad idea for the businesses it's presumably trying to serve. But what do I know?

lokar 1y ago
Citadel and other hedge funds have been moving people there (from NY and Chicago)
- bobbiechen 1y ago
  Anecdotally, I heard that at these firms, all the "interesting" work is moving to Florida office because of the longer non-compete period. New York and other offices still exist but the most promising proprietary stuff goes to Florida.
  - JackFr 1y ago
    They are moving to Florida because the personal income tax rate in Forida is 0% and in New York it's about 14%.
    - const_cast 1y ago
      As someone living in Texas, which also has no state income tax, it's not this simple. The tax burden is not actually lower, it's just more convoluted. Property taxes, aka wealth taxes, are much higher. These are passed along to consumers, meaning even if you don't have personal wealth you still pay a bit of it.
      - red-iron-pine 1y ago
        there have been a few threads here comparing TX to CA and found that CA is still pretty competitive even having a beefy income tax.

hollywood_court 1y ago

Ahh the party of small government strikes again.

meepmorp 1y ago
everyone's a minarchist, it's just they disagree on which bits of the state are necessary
- antonvs 1y ago
  You're either using the term incorrectly, or your overall claim is incorrect. For example, minarchists are not in favor of universal healthcare, by definition - it doesn't fit the short list of the kinds of roles that minarchists believe government should play. There are plenty of people who are in favor of universal healthcare, who can't be called minarchists.
- Supermancho 1y ago
  Well phrased.
HamsterDan 1y ago
This change neither increases nor decreases the size of the government, so it's unclear how you think "party of small government" is relevant here.
- hydrogen7800 1y ago
  "Size" can be power, not just headcount.
- const_cast 1y ago
  Colloquially, when people say "large government" they refer to the level and breadth of regulation, aka restrictions on private actors. This restricts private actors, so colloquially we say it made the government larger.
  - 1y ago

codeddesign 1y ago

“They would keep their pay and benefits but wouldn't be entitled to bonuses” This seems like a win for both sides. Employee’s would still be paid for keeping the non-compete.

black6 1y ago
That's always been the actual effect of non competes in the US. Slavery was abolished; you can't be told by a former employer that you can't work for someone else unless they continue to pay you not to. That you're being downvoted is telling for the HN crowd who will rally behind "tax the rich" but ignore the call to "help the poor."

codeddesign 1y ago

“They would keep their pay and benefits but wouldn't be entitled to bonuses” I fail to see the issue here. The employee’s would continue to receive pay for up to 4 yrs to keep the non-compete.

collingreen 1y ago
Financial industry comp for top earners is mostly bonuses so 4 years of not being able to earn a competitive rate isn't a high cost for the company to prevent you from helping competitors or keeping your skills up to date.
Avicebron 1y ago
Yeah I mean it's "scummy" as in you don't control your destiny, but if your guaranteed the pay and benefits for 4 years, and you know that up front when you sign the contract it's sort of like knowing you will get a sabbatical
orangecat 1y ago
The downside for employees is that they're not able to keep current and will likely have a harder time finding jobs in the future. The downside for society is that it will cause skilled people to not be producing anything.
Espressosaurus 1y ago
High earners get most of their compensation from bonuses, RSUs, etc., none of which will be paid out over the garden leave period. It means whoever employs you in Florida controls your destiny for the 4 years after you leave. If you don't see a problem with that I can only assume you hope you'll be the employer and not the employee.
OkayPhysicist 1y ago
Adding friction to changing jobs stifles competition (hey, it's right there in the name), and thus suppresses wages. Employers already have a massive advantage in employment negotiations, so a just society has zero reason to give them more.

0xcafefood 1y ago

Before even opening the article, I speculated that this is related to financial firms eyeing Miami as an alternative location to NYC. And right there at the top "The new law is a big win for Citadel CEO Ken Griffin, who advocated for it." Many hedge funds and trading companies saddle their employees with very stringent non-competes. Citadel Securities moved to Miami recently. "If we want to attract those kinds of clean, high-paying jobs, you have to provide those businesses protection on the investment that they're making and their employees." Why isn't the relatively free job market in Silicon Valley something "East Coast" corporations are looking to emulate? I speculate that there's a major difference in the moat (or lack thereof) between tech firms and financial firms. I can know roughly how Youtube or Instagram work and still not be able to replicate them and take their profits for myself. But knowing which "fishing hole" the guys at Citadel visit might be enough to replicate their strategy. They must not really have a "moat" (outside of the super low latency front running stuff that's really costly to get started).

lotsofpulp 1y ago
>Why isn't the relatively free job market in Silicon Valley something "East Coast" corporations are looking to emulate? Because there isn't that much potential profit in finance/trading. As the years go by, more and more is commoditized/automated.

pseudolus 1y ago

Apparently for employers a significant benefit is that it actually requires courts to issue an injunction against the covered employee. The injunction in turn can only be modified or dissolved if the covered employee – or prospective employer – proves by clear and convincing evidence (which must be based on non-confidential information) that: the employee will not perform similar work during the restricted period or use confidential information or customer relationships; the employer failed to pay the salary or benefits required under a covered garden leave agreement, or failed to provide consideration for a non-compete agreement, after the employee provided a “reasonable opportunity” to cure the failure; or the prospective employer is not engaged in (or preparing to engage in) a similar business as the covered employer within the restricted territory.[0] The "clear and convincing standard" (which is an intermediate burden of proof between the standard civil "balance of probabilities" and the strict "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard) coupled with the requirement of providing only non-confidential information to oppose the injunction will likely make this a slam dunk for employers. [0] https://www.fisherphillips.com/en/news-insights/florida-enforcing-non-compete-agreements.html https://www.fisherphillips.com/en/news-insights/florida-enfo...

oooyay 1y ago
> the employer failed to pay the salary or benefits required under a covered garden leave agreement, or failed to provide consideration for a non-compete agreement, after the employee provided a “reasonable opportunity” to cure the failure; or Do I understand this correctly - they're expanding non-competes to 4 years and you have to be paid full compensation during that time or the agreement is nullified?
- pseudolus 1y ago
  That appears to be a correct reading. The issue, apparently, is that you're only paid your base compensation. If a large portion of your total compensation is based on bonuses or equity grants, as is frequently the case in finance and tech, you're out of luck.
  - oooyay 1y ago

stego-tech 1y ago

More Capital lashing against the minor victories of the prior administration for workers. If your business information is so sensitive and valuable that losing an employee could hurt you, then you ought to be compensating that employee well enough that they don’t see the value in taking on the risk of a job hunt.

OkayPhysicist 1y ago

Noncompetes are a scourge. If your company requires them to survive, then it deserves to fail. Any argument in favor of them can be trivially nullified by pointing at California's unrivaled economic success, "despite" (or perhaps in part because of) its complete ban on noncompetes dating back to its founding. Indentured servitude has no place in the modern world.

echelon 1y ago
> Noncompetes are a scourge. I can see why small companies might want non-competes to prevent their employees from being poached by hyperscaler monopolies. If non-competes continue to exist, they should be pared down to small-scoped work descriptions only, eg. not "AI" broadly, but rather something like "AI diffusion for skeletal movement". The non-competes shouldn't have durations longer than a year, and the companies enacting the contract should be required to pay departing employees a salary (or some large percentage of a salary) if they want to enforce the non-compete. Non-competes should also only be used to prevent employees from joining larger companies, not smaller ones. And they should never prevent work at a startup or new venture.
- candiddevmike 1y ago
  If an employee was worth X and the company made them worth Y, they should pay them Y to continue having them as an employee. Anything else distorts the labor market. Now having to pay back training or education if you leave before Z months seems reasonable.
- ryandrake 1y ago
  I take issue with the idea that I, as an employee, may be "poached". I am not a deer or wild boar, owned by a feudal lord, and protected on his land from hunters. I should be free to have agency and enter into business arrangements with anyone I choose. Just because my company "invested" money into my growth/education/training, doesn't mean they should own me for some period of time while they figure out how to make that investment pay off. Let's stop using this word poached. It's not analogous to an employer/employee relationship.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

gohwell 1y ago

Paid holiday for 1-3 years, what’s wrong with that?

mendyberger 1y ago

Kind of a dumb question, but how does it work if you have a 10 year non-compete in FL but move to another state after 5 years, is the non-compete valid in the other state?

OkayPhysicist 1y ago
Generally yes, unless you move to California (which expressly bans noncompetes regardless of where they were signed or where the work was done), in which case it's a "consult a lawyer, but you're probably fine" situation.

kchoudhu 1y ago

The hedge fund effect.

ashoeafoot 1y ago

Ah, the rewards for those of us cosplaying as temporary embarrassed billionaires.

MattGrommes 1y ago

> Miami is the 'future of America' Probably true in that it's on track to be mostly destroyed by climate change and people are injuring themselves looking the other way.

robotnikman 1y ago

How does one become an employee that other companies fight over and try to poach?

mcv 1y ago

While I generally oppose non-competes, > They would keep their pay makes it significantly less bad. I always say that if they want to decide what I can and can't do, they're going to have to pay me. And this is that, so that's definitely something.

AvAn12 1y ago

Total waste of human capital - focused on those with highly-valued skills. What a dumb idea.