9 ms·
I don't understand why people have to try and read so much into someone leaving a company. High-ranking execs and employees change jobs all the time for numero
by rjf1990 12y ago
I don't understand why people have to try and read so much into someone leaving a company. High-ranking execs and employees change jobs all the time for numerous reasons.
- k-mcgrady 12y ago>> High-ranking execs and employees change jobs all the time for numerous reasons. They don't, that's why people are reading into it.
- DannyBee 12y agoThey really don't. What you just wrote is like saying "This is nothing out of the unusual. Cows turn themselves inside out all the time" (http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/149573/inside-out-cows http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/149573/inside-out-cows)
- rjf1990 12y agoThey really do. Anybody who's been at a big company sees it all the time. Most don't make news stories because they aren't at a sexy company like Google, leading up a division that's well-known among consumers. You wouldn't hear about something like the head of fraud detection at American Express leaving his job. I've seen it before (not at Amex, but other large companies).
- pessimizer 12y agoThat's only because you don't read creditnews.com. When a major exec leaves in my industry, everyone is talking about it on Monday, and lawsuits often ensue if they end up at a competitor.
- magicalist 12y agonon-competes are void in California.
- x0x0 12y agoonly up to a certain seniority level
- tptacek 12y ago[citation needed] There are things execs do that line employees don't that can presumably make a CA noncompete binding, like, for instance, accepting significant consideration specifically in return for a noncompete. But I don't believe seniority is itself a factor that can make a noncompete binding.
- pessimizer 12y agoNot based necessarily on a non-compete, but based on similar and concurrent projects, "trade secrets" and "proprietary architectures."