Good god I am frustrated.

[y4m]

Not looking for legal advice.  I live with a lawyer.  Our lawyers are involved.  This is a vent anyway.

We have been trying to hire someone for our team.  I've invested a ton of time in this, screening and interviewing and wooing and coaching, etc.  It is extremely difficult to 1. find someone qualified and 2. get them through our HQ cultural interviews.

But we did it.  Found someone who HQ loved who would also be amazing at the job.  Made her a great offer which she happily accepted.  Everyone is psyched.

And then we get her non-compete from the current employer, which is tangentially a competitor of ours, though not a core one.  It lists about 30 companies (ours is one of them) and says that for 3 years she essentially can't breathe in the same space as any of those companies or any company like them.  It is extremely extremely broad.  Based on what I know about non-competes, it seems very likely that this would be unenforceable, but we've found out that this company has a history of actually suing their past employees (and possibly their competitors as well) to enforce them.  Not that would win, but there's a good chance they will make her life miserable dragging her back to the state where they are based and draining her financially.

GAHHHHHH.  I can't ask her to put herself in that position.

This likely also means that my own promotion is on hold, since I think the vision was to promote me and have her plus a few others from my current team report to me.  

I am so frustrated.  Anyway, thanks for the vent.  And if you've got good beating a noncompete stories, I'd love to hear them.

[Deleted]

I wonder (out loud) how much $ it would take to make this go away. I'm sorry. That's really annoying. And what a terrible position for her. 3 years is crazy sauce. What is she supposed to do for 3 years?

[Deleted]

That sucks so bad.

We didn't beat the noncompete, but since DH's old company didn't have HR, no one ever bothered to make sure he'd signed theirs. He didn't. I think we have the unsigned copy somewhere in the house still. LOL.

[aurora]

Ugh - this is absolutely frustrating, I agree. When H started his own company he consulted a lawyer who assured him that the non-compete he had signed with previous company was unenforceable, but he still waited the full year before contacting former clients because he just didn't want to deal with getting sued. It's rough.

Have you asked her if she'd want to take the risk of being sued, or is the potential threat to the company enough to disqualify her?

[countthestars]

That's a huge bummer. Was she unaware that your company was listed in her non compete? That stinks for all of you.

[LoveTrains]

My H was just talking about the problem with non-competes in massachasuetts. He was telling me that they are bad for innovation and that there is a group trying to get a bill passed to ban them in the state.

[sproutmd]

What a pain, I am so sorry. I am especially sorry that it affects your promotion. Ugh.

[ESF]

That is horrible. You have seen enough of my rants about corporate America's power in the courts to know that I am throwing things over here just thinking about this shit.

[y4m]

She's not in a role where noncompetes typically come into play. I also moved from this type of role, and I've never seen a noncompete like this before in that role. Even in my new sales role, I have nothing like this in my contract.

Basically her company is unexpectedly dickish.

[ESF]

Feb 21, 2014 14:44:51 GMT -5 LoveTrains said:

My H was just talking about the problem with non-competes in massachasuetts. He was telling me that they are bad for innovation and that there is a group trying to get a bill passed to ban them in the state.

Yeah, there are a few states that have tried to curb their use.

Unfortunately, if there's a non-compete, there's also likely an arbitration agreement.  Per the Supreme Court last year, an arbitration agreement just has to give you a forum to protect your rights under federal law.  If you sign an arbitration agreement, it is extremely likely that a court will now be forced to interpret that to mean that you've given up any rights under state law.  For example, a worker who signs an arbitration agreement, and is paid less than their state minimum wage but still paid the federal minimum wage, would not likely have a case in arbitration.

So, while what Massachusetts is doing is admirable, it probably won't make a lick of difference in any employee's life until Congress passes the Arbitration Fairness Act to overturn all the awful things the Supreme Court has done.

[aurora]

Feb 21, 2014 14:50:07 GMT -5 ESF said:

Feb 21, 2014 14:44:51 GMT -5 LoveTrains said:

My H was just talking about the problem with non-competes in massachasuetts. He was telling me that they are bad for innovation and that there is a group trying to get a bill passed to ban them in the state.

Yeah, there are a few states that have tried to curb their use.

Unfortunately, if there's a non-compete, there's also likely an arbitration agreement.  Per the Supreme Court last year, an arbitration agreement just has to give you a forum to protect your rights under federal law.  If you sign an arbitration agreement, it is extremely likely that a court will now be forced to interpret that to mean that you've given up any rights under state law.  For example, a worker who signs an arbitration agreement, and is paid less than their state minimum wage but still paid the federal minimum wage, would not likely have a case in arbitration.

So, while what Massachusetts is doing is admirable, it probably won't make a lick of difference in any employee's life until Congress passes the Arbitration Fairness Act to overturn all the awful things the Supreme Court has done.

Yikes - I didn't know that about arbitration agreements and federal vs. state law. 

[y4m]

No arbitration agreement in this one.

[ESF]

Feb 21, 2014 14:53:06 GMT -5 aurora said:

Feb 21, 2014 14:50:07 GMT -5 ESF said:

Yeah, there are a few states that have tried to curb their use.

Unfortunately, if there's a non-compete, there's also likely an arbitration agreement.  Per the Supreme Court last year, an arbitration agreement just has to give you a forum to protect your rights under federal law.  If you sign an arbitration agreement, it is extremely likely that a court will now be forced to interpret that to mean that you've given up any rights under state law.  For example, a worker who signs an arbitration agreement, and is paid less than their state minimum wage but still paid the federal minimum wage, would not likely have a case in arbitration.

So, while what Massachusetts is doing is admirable, it probably won't make a lick of difference in any employee's life until Congress passes the Arbitration Fairness Act to overturn all the awful things the Supreme Court has done.

Yikes - I didn't know that about arbitration agreements and federal vs. state law. 

It is new.  The Supreme Court just made it up last year.  Even though John Roberts said ten years ago when he was on the DC Circuit that arbitration forums have to give you the same rights you'd have under state law, he apparently was convinced by the Chamber of Commerce in June 2013 to back off his old opinion, and rewrite things.  

[ESF]

Feb 21, 2014 14:55:34 GMT -5 y4m said:

No arbitration agreement in this one.

SCORE!!!!!

[miniroller]

Feb 21, 2014 14:45:54 GMT -5 y4m said:

She's not in a role where noncompetes typically come into play. I also moved from this type of role, and I've never seen a noncompete like this before in that role. Even in my new sales role, I have nothing like this in my contract.

Basically her company is unexpectedly dickish.

Gee, wonder why she left?! Ugh, just a sucky addition when everything was going right

[rubytue]

Feb 21, 2014 14:50:07 GMT -5 ESF said:

Unfortunately, if there's a non-compete, there's also likely an arbitration agreement.  Per the Supreme Court last year, an arbitration agreement just has to give you a forum to protect your rights under federal law.  If you sign an arbitration agreement, it is extremely likely that a court will now be forced to interpret that to mean that you've given up any rights under state law.  For example, a worker who signs an arbitration agreement, and is paid less than their state minimum wage but still paid the federal minimum wage, would not likely have a case in arbitration.

What in the ever-loving fuck?!

Ever-loving might be too kind.

This makes me want to go off on one of my rants about we the people working for the people, but the ever-loving fucks said corporations are people, didn't they?

[ESF]

Feb 21, 2014 14:57:47 GMT -5 Lucy Honeychurch said:

Non-competes are the suck. However, I'm interested in the fact that she didn't bother to look at hers before applying to your company. That would be kind of a red flag for me, to be honest.

Given that it's really broad, and non-competes are sometimes not enforceable, I don't think we can presume that she didn't look at it.  It seems possible that she might have known of its existence, but was hoping to get an offer before making the idea of how to break it become an issue.

[womet]

Is there a way to get around it? Like, can she be hired on through a contracting company rather than a direct hire? I've never seen a noncompete clause, so I have no idea if this is even a possibility but thought I'd throw it out there.

[Deleted]

We hired someone like that last yr then on the back end found out about the non compete. We were able to smooth it out with the other company and they let her out of the non compete agreement. Not sure how they worked it out. Legal took care of it. Miracles happen! LOL

[flatlan]

I'm sorry!!! It sucks when you put a ton of work into something and it turns out like this.

[lime]

H and I have each gone against a non compete clause before and while we have both been caught, neither company cared to do anything.  (devil)

Anyway, GL to you. I hope it works out.