Non-Competes
Non-Competes
(OP)
In viewing my responses on my previous thread, I would like to know where engineers stand as far as non-compete clauses go?
Are they good because they keep the greedy in line?
Are they bad because they hinder engineers from the persuit of happiness?
All thoughts and opinions are welcome.
Are they good because they keep the greedy in line?
Are they bad because they hinder engineers from the persuit of happiness?
All thoughts and opinions are welcome.





RE: Non-Competes
RE: Non-Competes
There is no such thing as a job for life these days and I dont want to have to leave town to change my job.
RE: Non-Competes
The only time it may come into force is if you start a business that competes directly with your former employer.
http://www.EsoxRepublic.com-SolidWorks API VB programming help
RE: Non-Competes
Chris
SolidWorks 08 0.0/PDMWorks 08
AutoCAD 06
ctopher's home (updated 10-07-07)
ctopher's blog
RE: Non-Competes
TygerDawg
Blue Technik LLC
Advanced Robotics & Automation Engineering
www.bluetechnik.com
RE: Non-Competes
Turns out it was about 3 companies I had never even heard of so it was no big deal.
Zuccus.
RE: Non-Competes
RE: Non-Competes
RE: Non-Competes
Non-competes are often enforced upone owners/partners/pricipals by the courts in the US.
For example, you own an engineering consultancy company. The buyers want to buy your company, and you sell. The contract will most likely have a provision that you don't go down the street and start another one to compete against them. In the contract, they may also limit where you can not start up another company (say not only the town, but the county), or a fixed duration within which you can not start up a company (say you have to wait at least 3 years). This in essence is a condition of the sale. This, the courts usually enforce.
"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
RE: Non-Competes
I think that the actual goal that firms are trying to accomplish with non-competes is that they want to make sure that employees don't take corporate information (ie, customer lists, contacts, pricing info, etc) to a competitor. When I left one place to go to a competitor, I was asked to sign a document to this effect, and my friend (who happens to be a lawyer), explained that this concept is pretty much assumed under the law, ie, that customer and pricing data is your employer's property, and you cannot use this confidential info to your own gain.
RE: Non-Competes
It's called "fiduciary duty". When one holds a position of employment, the employee has responsibilities that are legally implicit in having that position. The employee is trusted with sensitive information, and the law recognizes the keeping of that trust as part of an employee's lawful duty to his employer.
RE: Non-Competes
But it would be largely unfair to have a condition on a employee as this. This cuts the competition in salary. I understand this approach would have worked in the past but in todays world I dont think such a system would work.
In todays global market I dont think it would be practical for companies themselves. global companies need global resources to excel their performance and gain more profits. Now this non-competes may only create problem than solving.
Siddharth
These are my personal views/opinions and not of my employer's.
RE: Non-Competes
I had to sign one for my current place.
However they are pretty much meaningless, we've had several high profile tech guys leave and join competitors in the last 2 years and I haven't heard of any legal efforts to stop it.
However, we are involved in legal proceedings to protect patents with a company formed by former employees (possibly before they even had non competes here).
Before I joined one lead guy who'd worked for the company before it was acquired by the current corporation was fired for refusing to sign a non compete.
KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...
RE: Non-Competes
David
RE: Non-Competes
evil
RE: Non-Competes
In TX they are basically useless and you can join any company you want.
In most states and provinces in North America, non-competes for salaried engineers are not enforceable. Many precedents already set, so don't sweat it. Sign it, it's no good anyhow. No one can stop you from taking your next job.
Non-competes are not enforeced upon individuals by the courts in the US.
I had to sign one for my current place. However they are pretty much meaningless,
Cheers
Greg Locock
Please see FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
RE: Non-Competes
For my current job I didn't sign my contract as it basically said I couldn't work for anyone without permission being granted first. When I pointed out this would include mowing my neighbours grass in return for any reward (cup of coffee etc) they agreed it was silly and would correct it. Three years on and I still haven't signed the contract.
I remember in another thread here that people often just crossed out the bits of contracts they didn't like, initial the changes and then signed the document.
RE: Non-Competes
I've never been presented with a non-compete contract so maybe I don't know enough to discuss this intelligently, but the question did enter my mind...
Thanks,
Ben
RE: Non-Competes
Fairly solid ethical ground, tested many times.
RE: Non-Competes
I'm not sure how I feel about this. Having the clause removed from the contract would be ideal, of course, because it removes the ambiguity.
RE: Non-Competes
So, yes, its ethical.
RE: Non-Competes
RE: Non-Competes
So you think it should be allowable conduct for a proffesional engineer to sign a contract with no intention of honoring it?
stanweld,
that's a very good point. The only reason the employer has it in the contract is to scare people into staying at their job through misinformation. That definately doesn't sound very ethical.
RE: Non-Competes
RE: Non-Competes
Perhaps this is an issue that could be looked upon one way by employees (that it's no big deal), but heavily scrutizized by employers??? Legality or ethics aside, it could look bad to a potential employer who takes non-competes seriously.
I guess one could make the point that employers don't really take non-competes seriously and are just using them to bully employees as stanweld indicates, but that is a broad generalization and may not be true for all employers. I know at my previous employer a non-compete issue was taken very seriously and some bridges were definitely burned.
RE: Non-Competes
1. An employer cannot prevent you from obtain future employment. This is a view I heard several times from attornies as I was retiring from the military but still needd to work, and it's probably the legal basis for many non-competes being non-enforceable as mentioned above.
2. I've never been asked to sign a non-compete. If I were seeking employment as an engineer (or anything other than senior/executive management) and the company asked me to sign a non-compete agreement, I would think VERY, VERY carefully:
- I wouldn't agree to something that I knew I would violate merely because it was not "enforceable";
- This would be perhaps the first indication of the business and management practices used by the company. This would be a reason not to accept employment.
- If after considering the above, I still wanted employment at the company, I would seek to amend the agreement.
3. Where I have seen others using non-competes, it involved restrictions on an employee leaving the company and (a) taking customers/work with them to a new company,or (b) starting a new company on their own within a certain distance of the original company.
RE: Non-Competes
Its the individuals NEED, which makes the choice.(Supply Demand constraints)
Might be of concern in Sales.
Siddharth
These are my personal views/opinions and not of my employer's.
RE: Non-Competes
Regardless of whether or not any or all of it is enforceable, I signed it because I want the job.
I once worked at a company where one person left and started up a competing shop in the same city, using a lot of the same technology. This person also recruited a lot of my former coworkers. The company I was working for tried very hard to bring legal action with little to no success. This is an example of a case where all the non compete agreements proved worthless.
You will often times get the same thing when attempting to buy a car. They will put a paper in front of you stating that you agree not to sue them and go through arbitration if the car is a lemon. According to the atty I hired when I had a lemon those agreements are worthless and non binding.
My conclusion is that just because someone makes you agree to something as part of the condition of some form of offer or agreement, doesn't mean that their condition is binding and enforceable.
RE: Non-Competes
What is not enforceable is any non-compete agreement that simply states: "Thou shalt not take a job with a competitor, ever."
RE: Non-Competes
He said that 99% of time companies never pursue it, but he said ALL of his clients are the 1%, so it can happen and it is devastating. Even if they can't ultimately win and get anything from you, they can file an injunction to keep you from working until the case goes to trial, which could easily be 6 months or more.
My husband stays home with our young children and I am the main breadwinner. The lawyer advised me not to take that chance at this time in my life. I didn't interview with the company that could potentially be construed as a competitor and took a job with another company. I am glad I did, because my conscience was clear and I didn't lose sleep worrying about whether I would get hauled into court.
For me it was a peace of mind thing more than anything.
I signed a non-compete at this job, but it isn't as restrictive as the last one, and I know there are ways to find jobs that wouldn't violate it.