Trump appointed Judge overturns Biden ban on non-compete clauses

I likes some competition, but if you don't like 'em, don't sign 'em. all else =, I've no prob with a binding contract. a pal of mine worked for Stryker & a competitor hired him away & paid him to sit on his ass for a year due to the no compete. Pat Stryker is my hero. She pumps millions into our local music scene, brings tons of national acts here for free & owns 2 great nonprofit venues as well as the music district. In fact, going to a PS venue tom night to see Waxahatchee (& get covid).

Fort Collins Billionaire Pat Stryker, Heir to the Stryker Fortune: What Is Stryker?

 

That's not how it works. It is more like you leave your job and take the last employers trade secrets and clients even after signing a no compete.

 

I have non-competes since my employees have access to proprietary customer information and pricing. However, if an employee is worthy of being fired, I'd like nothing better than they go to work for my competition and haven't enforced it.

 

btw, I had no idea Biden imposed such a terrible piece of shit as this.

 

sad that you support such crap. A non compete is far more valuable than a simple NDA. My bud woulda taken all their customers with him. These are voluntary & workers can make more dough by signing them b/c it makes them more valuable. BIG GOV should stay in their lane. Trying to outlaw agreements between consenting adults is garbage.

 

The problem is these “non-competes” sometimes apply to those who do not have trade secrets and are not even really in a position to fight against them.

I think it should probably be like OT pay rules, which stipulate that you must be “manager” level to be exempt from OT (and there are even too many shenanigans with “exempt” employees, but that’s a whole ‘nother subject). Non-competes should be similar. You should have to be manager level AND demonstrably have control over trade secrets. The field of employees they should be applicable to should be pretty narrow.

 

You got a link with #s, stats. b/c I have never heard of that. If true, there may be some merit, but even if true, an all out ban seems dumb.

 

Whoa. Found my own link. I had no idea.

Biden administration bans noncompete agreements, setting up legal showdown with business groups


yeah, this seems like BS. maybe ban them for hourly wage earners or ban them for peeps that make less than a certain amount. This is not what non competes should be used for. &, sadly, they probably are taking adv of people who don't know better & who don't know how to leverage these contracts to their adv.

“When the facts change, I change my mind - what do you do, sir?”
― John Maynard Keynes

 

My father in law worked for Stryker for about a decade before he retired. Great company.

Enjoy Waxahatchee! Saw them earlier this year and really enjoyed it.

 

Hell, even without noncompetes I’ve heard a few cases of managers going behind employees backs and telling competing managers not to give an interview. Not because the employee was bad, but actually because it’s a tight job market and the employee couldn’t be replaced! (the employee was seeking more money).

Makes you wonder how much that sort of thing goes on. It’s basically illegal collusion (basically undersells it, more like it’s textbook anti-competitive business practice). Just shows it doesn’t have to be any type of sophisticated scheme, just two managers at different companies that are buddy-buddy. Technically illegal, but some individual $15 or $20 employee isn’t likely taking it to court.

 

I couldn’t agree more. Let the contract and common sense rule. Non-competes are extremely common in private equity. They were a requirement to work for a PE firm before the FTC’s ruling, a requirement to be a c-level executive of PE backed firm, and during the last 10 years, were a requirement to be employed by a PE backed firm at the middle management level.

I’ve seen 1,000’s of non-competes for companies my firm invested in. Probably 10 of them made it to a judge for some sort of enforcement action. It was impossible to not agree with the judges and case law regarding the terms in those 10 cases. Specifically, I remember a Jacksonville based CEO that wanted to move to St. Simon’s and start a direct competitor after pocketing millions and trade secrets. The judge enforced the non-compete.

Another CEO forced any employee that supervised another employee to sign a 5 year, nationwide non-compete. Judge in that case said it was unenforceable (which both sets of counsel said she would).

The FTC shouldn’t have the right to say non-competes are all bad. I’d be shocked if this doesn’t make it to the Supreme Court. And I don’t like hardliner activist judges in Texas setting national policy either.

 

Freedom of choice! Oh, except when you enter into an agreement (student loan, non-compete); then, damn your stupid choices and we - who know what's better for you - will get you out of the choice you made.

Signed,
The Democrat Party

 

I met someone who purchased a business providing services to other businesses. Whomever advised this man either did so poorly or he didn't listen as he purchased the business and not one employee had any non-compete.
Immediately after he took over a bunch of the salespeople went to a competitor, and took many of the clients with them. Felt so bad for the guy.

Non-competes are generally BS. Difficult to prohibit someone from making a living.
Piracy and stealing customer lists, proprietary company info and using that against your former employer is - and should be - a "no no."


On the other side I knew a guy who worked for a printer. New company bought the independent printer and had 3 inches of paperwork to sign off on in order to keep his job. He said he had to review all the documents before he could sign anything and the HR person said "Fine, let me know when you're done" and left the room. He took out the non-compete and put it in his pocket - signed everything else. When they began working him for 60-70 hours a week as a "Manager" he asked for compensation and they said "no, sir, your exempt." He said "Okay" and, since he WAS the printer as far as customers were concerned, started his own business in the same building as his former boss. Details, contracts, and what you get in writing matter. A lot. He's still in the printing business and has done very well for himself.

 

Does anybody believe this?

 

No, the three inches of paperwork required would have mentioned the non-compete in all the other legal / employment docs and they would not be enforceable without the non-compete. And if the guy was the business, he would have left and taken all the customers before a fake promotion to manager came up. And if he wasn’t even a manager before hand, how could he be so important that all the customers would leave with him? Pure non-sense.

However, B2B services are where non-competes play a particularly important role and acquisitions (where part of the purchase price assumes ordinary course business practices) also rely on non-competes. I’m sure whatever website that story was stolen from was trying to hit on those themes.

 

Back to your original post, they don’t have to sign them.

First ER group I worked for wanted the PA’s to sign no competes. In reality there was no way any of us could leave and take “patients” it was ridiculous. We all got together and refused. They weren’t going to fire all 8 PA’s that accounted for 40% of the patient visits. So they dropped it.

It makes a bit more sense in a private practice but still can be tough to enforce.