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.
I wouldn't go along with a non-compete for what I assume is a low-paid, likely part-time job. I would consider it for a highly paid position. Depending on your skills and the job market where you live, you could quit your current job, take the side gig, and find another job to replace the first one. If you don't have any real options, though, then it's probably not worth the risk of being fired.
You are employed and should be making a sufficient, sustainable income to live within your means and develop retirement. A second job should not be in any form of consideration unless you are a corporate executive being asked to serve on a board of directors or chairman of an organization. Your employer has every right to decide if you should or should not be working outside of normal work hours. The employer is paying you to focus your attention on their work and outside interruptions are extremely unprofessional and grounds for termination. Although you may not feel there is a risk it is not your place to make that evaluation. It is also the company who decides if it would impact their business. The employer has set a rule - follow it or seek new employment, which will likely be impossible when the potential employer contacts your former employer for termination reason.
This is not a fun thing to discuss but it is the law and it is the company's right as defined in their bylaws. Please continue to focus on your existing job and discuss any concerns with your manager.
I make nearly minimum wage, so no, cannot live simply on that. You sound like a privileged baby boomer talking about how no one should have to get a second job to survive. You must live in a dream world.
I thought right-to-work states prohibit employers from not letting you a get a second job. If I am an exempt/hourly employee, and I am not currently on the clock, my employer should not be telling me what I can and cannot do. Of course this wouldn't include situations where I could be giving away trade secrets or working for a competitor.
Could my job also tell me that on my time off I'm not allowed to wear yellow, eat pizza, or drive on a Tuesday?
II thought right-to-work states prohibit employers from not letting you a get a second job. If I am an exempt/hourly employee, and I am not currently on the clock, my employer should not be telling me what I can and cannot do.
No....as noted in several posted above "right to work" means you cannot be forced to join a union to take a job.
Most employers will allow employees to have other jobs but require you to clear them ahead of time to ensure there is no confict of interest. There will be lots of second jobs you can get that would not present a conflict. However, I would expect the gym to consider you getting additional work with their clients to watch over them when that is what you do at the gym to be a conflict, or at the minimum a potental conflict. You could babysit non-gym clients, work in a restaurant or a call center, etc. It is just this particular form of secondary employment that I think the gym is right to restrict. And again the restriction is not saying you can't do it but that not doing it is a condition of continued employment with them. That makes it different from a non-compete where an employer can restrict a former employee from working for a competitor for some period of time after the employment has ceased.
RTW has everything to do with unions. The poster you are telling to seek medical attention knows more about labor law than just about everyone on this forum put together.
OP: I am sure they view it as a conflict of interest.
No. A right to work state dictates that there can be NO unions in regards to employees being forced to join one. This is of the most basic of understanding of how employment works. You don't seem well, god bless. The OP's issue doesn't pertain to unions, at all.
I make nearly minimum wage, so no, cannot live simply on that. You sound like a privileged baby boomer talking about how no one should have to get a second job to survive. You must live in a dream world.
I thought right-to-work states prohibit employers from not letting you a get a second job. If I am an exempt/hourly employee, and I am not currently on the clock, my employer should not be telling me what I can and cannot do. Of course this wouldn't include situations where I could be giving away trade secrets or working for a competitor.
Could my job also tell me that on my time off I'm not allowed to wear yellow, eat pizza, or drive on a Tuesday?
Agree.
For the last paragraph, I would add: Or when to sit, when to stand, when to walk, when to go to the washroom, when to take a bath, shower, when to eat, when to go to sleep, whom to associate with or date and when to have sex, how many babies you can make...what kind of employer is that?
Last edited by AnOrdinaryCitizen; 06-18-2017 at 02:35 PM..
Looks like the OP still doesn't get it, and never will.
The OP is like any other person that comes to this specific sub section looking for 'advice' on their job situation. That is, they are absolutely convinced that their viewpoint and actions are the right ones, so they are only interested in those that encourage their way of thought and of fighting back against the man. And so they'll continue to argue against those who offer an opposing (but correct) viewpoint. Expect this to continue for another 5 pages as the OP refuses to cede their viewpoints.
It has been repeatedly pointed out the difference between the concept of right to work and at will employment. Right to work is simply the right for workers to decide for themselves whether to join or not join an union, or pay union dues. At will is the employee's right to let go an employee for any reason. And still the OP continues to use the term "right to work," so that right there should tell you the OP will stubbornly refuse to acknowledge the truth of the situation.
Now, there are some states like California that have legal precedence where employers cannot legally prohibit an employee in general from a second job (moonlighting). HOWEVER, an employer still has every right to prohibit an employee from having a second job if it represents a conflict of interest, if it negatively affects the employee's job performance, or if such a job may potentially create legal headaches.
Notice that the OP said nothing about the gym prohibiting employees from moonlighting in general. What the gym is prohibiting is the OP from babysitting client's kids outside of the gym, due to the safety of the children. And the gym has every right to do this, for the reasons already mentioned in this thread (that the OP will continue to ignore).
If the OP wants to earn more money, and there's nothing wrong with that, then find clients to babysit outside of the gym (that have no ties to the gym). So simple a concept.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,662 posts, read 81,403,499 times
Reputation: 57922
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnOrdinaryCitizen
These don't make sense. What if you have only 0.4, 0.5 or even 0.7 FTE (full-time equivalent), which means you work only 32, 40 or 56 hours in two weeks? That's not enough to pay for food and rent, not to mention to pay for anything else. Of course it depends on how much per hour you get pay and the cost of living in your city. Thus, of course you need to find another job. Or even you work full-time, no employer can forbid you to work another job somewhere else. What you do out of the working hours is none of any employer's business as long as you don't do any harm/damage to the employer.
The point here is about the conflict of interest at your workplace. You can have another job anywhere else out of your work hours there as long as you don't have anything to do with the employer's clients or their relatives. You may ask: how would the employer know? People talk.
Yes, this. My employer has no problem with my business on the side, for example, but I had to give up the customers that are also customers of my employer, due to possible conflict of interest. Such a policy is legal, makes sense, and you can be legally fired for failure to follow it. In our case it's considered an ethics violation, which is grounds for dismissal and it has happene.
No. A right to work state dictates that there can be NO unions in regards to employees being forced to join one. This is of the most basic of understanding of how employment works. You don't seem well, god bless. The OP's issue doesn't pertain to unions, at all.
Correct. You can't be forced to join a union, which makes it a union issue. Now off to the "ignore" list with you. Good day.
I live in a right-to-work state. I work for a nonprofit gym chain watching children while their parents work out. The gym does not allow their employees to take outside babysitting jobs with their members (although doing so would not take business away from the gym). They claim it's for the safety of the children, which makes no sense to me. Shouldn't that be between the parent(s) and the potential babysitter, not the gym unless it's on their property during the employee's work hours? I recently had a mother I had met via watching her child at the gym ask me to babysit her child at home for date nights with her husband. I told her I would think about it. Can my employer legally prohibit me from taking this job just because she is a member? Isn't that against right-to-work laws? Are they allowed to tell me what I can and cannot do when I am off the clock?
TIA!!!
Yes, they can if you sign an employment agreement stating as much.
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.