4 ms·
At JJ, it was more about operational secrets that can't be protected by law. However, I mentioned in my original post that I don't necessarily think it's right
by bsbechtel 12y ago
At JJ, it was more about operational secrets that can't be protected by law. However, I mentioned in my original post that I don't necessarily think it's right or wrong, it's just why JJ does it.
I generally agree with you that limiting future employment is generally not a good thing, although I'm not convinced getting rid of non-competes in minimum wage jobs would materially affect wages. At most, it might prevent someone from taking a manager position at Subway, but I don't think it is going to raise the overall wages of restaurant workers.
- tptacek 12y agoJimmy Johns is a franchise operation with tens of thousands of employees. Their retail workers do not have access to meaningful "operational secrets". It wouldn't matter if they did, either: trade secrets can be protected directly without noncompetes.