Timberwolf, post: 376121, member: 10599 wrote: I signed it. It was a mistake, and I knew it, but they had me over a barrel. Long story short, they were horrible people, and if I had it to do over, I would figure something else out.
There are "outs".....
"Commonly, when an employer elects to enforce a non-compete agreement, an employee will defend not only on the ground that he does not pose a serious competitive risk, but that the employee should be relieved of his non-compete obligations due to offending conduct by the employer or to some technical failure of the agreement."
It worked for me way back in 1987. B-)
FL/GA PLS., post: 376363, member: 379 wrote: There are "outs".....
"Commonly, when an employer elects to enforce a non-compete agreement, an employee will defend not only on the ground that he does not pose a serious competitive risk, but that the employee should be relieved of his non-compete obligations due to offending conduct by the employer or to some technical failure of the agreement."
It worked for me way back in 1987. B-)
I am glad you were successful.
what did your defense cost you? both in money and time...
and, what state was it?
[USER=60]@Peter Ehlert[/USER]
Thanks
$0.00, Too many to remember (does worrying count?)
FL
I did agree to "keep my mouth shut" (my terminology), about the whole thing, and have upheld that agreement. B-)
I signed one when I sold a firm in which I was a co-owner, but only because I was adequately compensated for the sale and had a guarantee of employment with them or a cash buy-out for the life of the non-compete agreement. That seemed fair.
Honor You Word (and contracts)
🙂 I agreed to "keep my mouth shut" once on another issue, but there was also an agreed time limit... any day now you all will hear about that one (maybe)
As with most things, I wouldn't have a problem with anything reasonable. I've seen instances where people signed and honored no-competes when selling a business, it was one of the terms of the sale. The a-holes I mentioned in a prior post wanted me to sign something that would have effectively barred me from taking a better job in the profession - which, considering how crappy their offer was, is probably a common occurrence.
Worked for a guy in the mid '90's that forced these on his party chiefs. Sign it or leave was his words.
Being young and stupid (and broke), I doubled my wage in one day (by signing). He cut my hours and renigged on a promised performance bonus (unwritten of course) so after three weeks, I left.
The guy told me he "owned me now & would pinch my pocket book" if I went to work locally. That night his competitor called and said he would pay the legal fees if I were sued. I went to work there the next day.
My new employer did exactly what he said he would and we won the case and the appeal.
Sad thing is, the prick that sued us is still growing a succesfull business that he has little to do with. He rubber stamps whatever his underlings put in front of him. Terrible person and worse surveyor still raking it in.
Do these non compete contracts state what the penalty is for breaching the contract, say $10,000? Or is it just words "... you agree not to ..." with no stated penalty - the only ones I have seen are just words, because I assume they would only be enforced if the breach occurred while still employed and the penalty then was termination (of employment).
If asked to sign one, would it be reasonable to ask for compensation in the form of a cash payout to cover the time you must site at home and do nothing while the time clause runs out ?
I mean if they want you to site at home and do nothing for 6 months, surely they must compensate you for that obligation ?
If they were prepared to pay me my going renumeration to site at home for 6 months, I would probably sign it, if not, then no ways.