U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-05-2018, 05:41 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
3,056 posts, read 1,034,591 times
Reputation: 3915

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by CGab View Post
I had an employer once that asked me to sign a no compete. Basically stating if I quit, I can't solicit any of my clients when I go work for someone else. If I did they could sue me for lost commissions, breach of contract, etc. I was told if I did not sign it then I couldn't work for them. I refused to sign it and I walked.
Your option, of course. Not uncommon in industries where someone can learn (or steal) a boatload of proprietary information like client lists, discount and sale rates or manufacturing techniques, or spend a long time becoming trained at a job. The employer wants to ensure fair return for investment, and minimal damage from info walking out the door. Slavery continuing to be illegal, NC clauses give both parties an option.

The OP's issue appears to be between companies, for which there can be many reasons.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-05-2018, 05:55 PM
 
2,360 posts, read 1,030,857 times
Reputation: 2071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
Your option, of course. Not uncommon in industries where someone can learn (or steal) a boatload of proprietary information like client lists, discount and sale rates or manufacturing techniques, or spend a long time becoming trained at a job. The employer wants to ensure fair return for investment, and minimal damage from info walking out the door. Slavery continuing to be illegal, NC clauses give both parties an option.

The OP's issue appears to be between companies, for which there can be many reasons.

I can understand if you work for companies like Amazon.. but for what i do, its just typical NOC stuff that is basic at any company level. But being invested vs learning a new skill set that I cant use for x amount of time is kinda stupid dont ya think?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2018, 05:58 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
3,056 posts, read 1,034,591 times
Reputation: 3915
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitpausebutton2 View Post
I can understand if you work for companies like Amazon.. but for what i do, its just typical NOC stuff that is basic at any company level. But being invested vs learning a new skill set that I cant use for x amount of time is kinda stupid dont ya think?
Do you have a no-compete clause in your employment agreement? I thought you were talking about your company's advertising limitations.

No, there's little or no reason to NC commodity workers (which most are - no insult). It's only those who get extensive specialized training on the employer's dime or have access to potentially damaging information that are NC'ed. Typically.


Note utterly conventional use of "get" without implication anything here was free.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2018, 06:32 PM
 
2,360 posts, read 1,030,857 times
Reputation: 2071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
Do you have a no-compete clause in your employment agreement? I thought you were talking about your company's advertising limitations.

No, there's little or no reason to NC commodity workers (which most are - no insult). It's only those who get extensive specialized training on the employer's dime or have access to potentially damaging information that are NC'ed. Typically.


Note utterly conventional use of "get" without implication anything here was free.
I do and had to read it twice to understand the language in it. But i can opt-out later on after 2 years of service with the company. I just dont understand why they need one for my job but it is what it is.. and stupid, from a employee point of view.

Just open generally why have them from the start anyways? rather its BvB or BvE..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-05-2018, 06:37 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
3,056 posts, read 1,034,591 times
Reputation: 3915
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitpausebutton2 View Post
I do and had to read it twice to understand the language in it. But i can opt-out later on after 2 years of service with the company. I just dont understand why they need one for my job but it is what it is.. and stupid, from a employee point of view.

Just open generally why have them from the start anyways? rather its BvB or BvE..
Sorry it impinges on your notion of utterly free markets, or whatever. I don't think anyone can make the issue any simpler.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2018, 11:25 AM
 
29,832 posts, read 15,221,531 times
Reputation: 15591
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
No, there's little or no reason to NC commodity workers (which most are - no insult). It's only those who get extensive specialized training on the employer's dime or have access to potentially damaging information that are NC'ed. Typically.
That seems to have changed lately. Clerks, even waitstaff have had NC clauses added to their contracts. It gives the employer an extra edge, after all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2018, 11:30 AM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
3,056 posts, read 1,034,591 times
Reputation: 3915
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
That seems to have changed lately. Clerks, even waitstaff have had NC clauses added to their contracts. It gives the employer an extra edge, after all.
Interesting. Another datum supporting the observation that wage employees are not benefiting from the long economic boom, but that employers as a whole are using 2008 as a reason to keep squeezing pay, benefits and working terms.

So it's sure a good thing we slashed their taxes, right? They've pretty much exhausted all the profit potential from sitting on employee costs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2018, 01:11 PM
 
29,832 posts, read 15,221,531 times
Reputation: 15591
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
Interesting.
Isn't it, though? Illinois went so far as to pass legislation banning NC clauses for people making less than $13/hr.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2018, 01:28 PM
 
2,360 posts, read 1,030,857 times
Reputation: 2071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
Isn't it, though? Illinois went so far as to pass legislation banning NC clauses for people making less than $13/hr.
So this gives them the excuse to pay people less then $13 a hour now? but screws the employee in the process
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2018, 01:54 PM
 
8,386 posts, read 7,376,508 times
Reputation: 18254
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitpausebutton2 View Post
I can understand if you work for companies like Amazon.. but for what i do, its just typical NOC stuff that is basic at any company level. But being invested vs learning a new skill set that I cant use for x amount of time is kinda stupid dont ya think?
What the company is saying, is that you will not take a skill you learn at their facility at their expense, and leave them to use that same skill to help a competitor to help the new company move ahead of the original company. This type of non compete clause, is wide spread among employers.

You may think it is alright for you to let your old employer train you and you gain a new skill, that you can take to a competitor and sell your services at a higher income rate. But companies don't feel that way.

It involves a lot more than just a skill. Imagine your employer develops a new product, at a cost of $3,000,000. You are one of the developers, and it is a product they will bring on the market in 6 months. The product will be a huge seller, and be very profitable for the company. Without the non compete clause, you can quit and go to work with the other company and use your knowledge of the new product, you can help the new company come out in 3 months with the same type product, at no cost to develop the product they are going to bring out. The new employer, dominates the market without the expense to develop the market to the extent your original employer does not even bring it out on the market.

From your statement above, you think you should be able to go to work for your present employer just long enough to learn a skill, you can take to the new employer to earn more money.

And that is the attitude of the young work force today, which is get a job and learn a skill they can sell for a higher income at another job. You see them advocating this on these threads.

Then they complain, that companies no longer want to train people just starting out, and only want to hire people with 5 or more years experience.

It is because they are tired of spending time and money training new workers who will leave as soon as they learn the skill, and sell that knowledge to another employer for more money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top