Comment on Federal judge partially blocks U.S. ban on noncompetes
jo3shmoo@sh.itjust.works 3 months agoIf it worked that way in the US then that would be sensibly pro-worker while allowing the existing employer to defend their intellectual property and investments in employees.
The reality is I have a 2 year noncompete that simply prevents me from working for competitors within 50 miles of any of my job sites unless I want to open myself up to a lawsuit. If I left today, I’d have to travel way further to get to an acceptable location, but would certainly not be receiving any compensation for that hassle from my previous employer. The elimination of noncompetes would be a huge boon to me and my colleagues, but this sort of court shenanigans is why I said I’d wait to be excited until it actually took effect.
Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 months ago
Honestly I think instead of banning non-competes they should just make it a hard requirement that a non-compete must be X percentage(no smaller then 50%) of your salary per year for the non-compete so for example if you made $60,000 and, and it was a 2-year agreement then you would get $30,000 a year. Which in my opinion is fair because the entire point of a non-compete because you know information that a competitor could use that would give them a financial advantage so it makes sense that they would have to pay for your silence that you’re not going to give that information away. If a company is saying they’re not willing to pay that money that means the information you know isn’t enough for them to care about so a non-competient be in place in the first place