Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Biden plans to ban non-compete clauses/agreements

#1
Question  Leigha Offline
My employer requires non-compete agreements from all employees who interact with clients (my role), which basically states that you're not legally allowed to work for any competitor for up to one year, after leaving the firm. These often don't hold up in court, because most everyone I've known who has non-competes, have left companies to work for their competitors and haven't been sued. It's often not worth the court costs and energy to chase down former employees, but this isn't to say there aren't a few employers out there who wouldn't strongly consider suing past employees for violating their contracts. 

Interestingly, Trump wanted to put an end to non-competes, as well. I didn't realize until running across this article, that the President would have the authority to ban such agreements between employers and employees, in the private sector. What do you think? 

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/h...auses.aspx
Reply
#2
Syne Offline
Not sure an FTC ruling alone would hold up in court. Such things should be done legislatively.

But would banning non-competes mean that we couldn't ban former Congressmen from lobbying? The latter uses knowledge gained in the former.
Reply
#3
C C Offline
Roy Maurer, from article Wrote:Proponents of eliminating the clauses argue that noncompete agreements—which bar workers from accepting new employment in their field or industry for a certain period, often a year or more after they leave an employer—reduce competition among businesses and stifle workers' job mobility and wage growth. The clauses were first introduced to prevent upper-level employees from taking trade secrets to rival businesses but have since proliferated to low-wage and low-skill workers.

No-poaching agreements—when employers agree not to hire workers from one another—make it harder for workers to be recruited by competitors or negotiate better terms of employment.

With respect to non-compete clause efforts deemed truly critical for company survival, rather than those just keeping a $13-an-hour Sam Nam tied down for the sadistic glee of it...

An example often used against NCCs is the success of Silicon Valley. In spite of those enterprises losing trade secrets, intellectual property, and skilled employees (that they invested in the training and education of), the region has nevertheless boomed. The inability to limit employee mobility has even been declared its "secret weapon" rather than a detrimental menace. Similar arguments have been made that California industries overall likewise don't hurt from the state prohibiting or not enforcing NCCs.

However, I'd caution against declaring such a conclusion applying everywhere without examining the specific aspects of each case and location. Simply being at or near an important seaport guarantees a constant flow of imported/exported goods, busy dealings and money transactions -- that can keep a metropolitan area and its businesses afloat despite bad decisions. And California is hemorrhaging companies to other states at a great rate due to its policies.

Plus, the upfront appearance of worker defection not being hindered in the NCC manner doesn't mean the technology businesses in California haven't found other methods. Especially when it comes to exploiting immigrant labor.{*}

On the pro-side: Without a fluid workforce ability to change employers slash get another job in the same field quickly, California would supposedly have even more individuals "on the welfare service rolls" and an "increase in people seeking social services from the state".

However, on neg-side: In other parts of the country that approach can undermine the incentive for companies to educationally elevate promising workers skill-wise and groom them for higher functions or positions. Which is to say, who wants to invest in someone who might toss loyalty to the wind and bolt to the opposition or set-up their own enterprise after all that is spent on them?

- - - footnote - - -

{*} Investigation Reveals Silicon Valley's Abuse of Immigrant Tech Workers: "These under-the-radar operations act as labor brokers, helping foreign skilled workers deal with the complicated paperwork needed to get jobs in the U.S. and then offering their services to American tech companies and government agencies. They can significantly streamline the never-ending hunt for talent in places like Silicon Valley, where demand for software engineers can exceed supply. But according to a new report, they have also pocketed wages and benefits from workers and even sued them for changing jobs, and apparently, many big-name tech companies---including Cisco, Verizon, Apple, Google and eBay---have turned a blind eye to the abuses."

Why Silicon Valley Wouldn’t Work Without Immigrants: Critics of the industry’s friendliness toward immigrants say it comes down to money — that technology companies take advantage of visa programs, like the H-1B system, to get foreign workers at lower prices than they would pay American-born ones.

But if that criticism rings true in some parts of the tech industry, it misses the picture among Silicon Valley’s top companies. [...] today’s most ambitious tech companies are not like factories. They’re more like athletic teams. They’re looking for the LeBrons and Bradys — the best people in the world to come up with some brand-new, never-before-seen widget, to completely reimagine what widgets should do in the first place.

“It’s not about adding tens or hundreds of thousands of people into manufacturing plants,” said Aaron Levie, the co-founder and chief executive of the cloud-storage company Box. “It’s about the couple ideas that are going to be invented that are going to change everything.”

Why do tech honchos believe that immigrants are better at coming up with those inventions? It’s partly a numbers thing. As the tech venture capitalist Paul Graham has pointed out, the United States has only 5 percent of the world’s population; it stands to reason that most of the world’s best new ideas will be thought up by people who weren’t born here.
Reply
#4
stryder Offline
While I'm not particularly versed in contractual law, I would suggest that if you feel like you are being railroaded into an unfair contract that seems out of place with what you do for a living to talk with a lawyer or seek legal advice. Getting that information before signing any agreement is something you should do if you are serious about it.

In the case of dealing with clients, I would guess they would be worried that if you built up a repour with some clients and then say decided to go into business yourself by poaching them from your previous employer (Say for instance becoming a self-employed broker, albeit brokering does mean you could still arrange business for your old employer if you left amicably.) or using your contacts with a new employer.

(One line of business that would likely act like this is actually Realtors that wouldn't want their mealtickets poached)
Reply
#5
Zinjanthropos Offline
(Nov 27, 2020 05:56 AM)Leigha Wrote: My employer requires non-compete agreements from all employees who interact with clients (my role), which basically states that you're not legally allowed to work for any competitor for up to one year, after leaving the firm. These often don't hold up in court, because most everyone I've known who has non-competes, have left companies to work for their competitors and haven't been sued. It's often not worth the court costs and energy to chase down former employees, but this isn't to say there aren't a few employers out there who wouldn't strongly consider suing past employees for violating their contracts. 

Interestingly, Trump wanted to put an end to non-competes, as well. I didn't realize until running across this article, that the President would have the authority to ban such agreements between employers and employees, in the private sector. What do you think? 

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/h...auses.aspx

Sign of the times. This is just one person’s viewpoint, someone I know who’s job is to hire & fire. Tells me she does more hiring than firing. Why? In her words it’s the new generation of workers who not only lie on resumes but tell her when they’ll work and also give their reasons for the times they won’t show up (ie. no one to watch kids at times). Applicants know the benefit package and labor laws better than knowing what her company actually does. 

Oh ya, most of them just don’t give a shit or have no work ethic. No loyalty and generally a pain in the ass. I don’t think she’s worried about intel sharing, especially if the person leaving never had enough time or couldn’t care less. She says if a competitor asks for a reference check on a former terrible employee then she’ll gladly tell them ....... well, you can figure that one out.
Reply
#6
Leigha Offline
(Nov 27, 2020 12:07 PM)stryder Wrote: While I'm not particularly versed in contractual law, I would suggest that if you feel like you are being railroaded into an unfair contract that seems out of place with what you do for a living to talk with a lawyer or seek legal advice.  Getting that information before signing any agreement is something you should do if you are serious about it.

In the case of dealing with clients, I would guess they would be worried that if you built up a repour with some clients and then say decided to go into business yourself by poaching them from your previous employer (Say for instance becoming a self-employed broker, albeit brokering does mean you could still arrange business for your old employer if you left amicably.) or using your contacts with a new employer.

(One line of business that would likely act like this is actually Realtors that wouldn't want their mealtickets poached)

Unfortunately, it’s pretty standard in my industry. I’m in marketing and part of my role deals with learning confidential info from my clients in terms of what isn’t working and what they need help with. My firm’s concern is if I leave, I’ll take these relationships with me. A few of my friends have violated non-competes and some high revenue clients have “followed” them, so employers are worried about that, understandably. Nothing wrong with a clause that stipulates not being permitted to contact clients for a year, but forbidding former employees from taking another job in the same industry for a year is a big ask, imo.

Biden to the rescue! Big Grin
Reply
#7
Zinjanthropos Offline
What about the claims that Google is listening? What about Hackers? More sophisticated means of gathering intel then any former employee can offer...lol
Reply
#8
C C Offline
(Nov 27, 2020 05:05 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: What about the claims that Google is listening? What about Hackers? More sophisticated means of gathering intel then any former employee can offer...lol

Even Don Draper will be replaced by an AI program embodied in a social-interacting android someday, so the struggle to hang onto an autodidatic "natural" that the cocktail-drinking suits refined, polished, and invested time in will be a relic concern.

Is smartdust already an outdated or unnecessary hope, to sprinkle around anywhere for eavesdropping or visual spying? Maybe it will be the microbot fly buzzing around in the meeting room, instead, which delivers the "skinny".

In prehistoric times there was browsing around in the waste paper baskets when no one was looking, before the existence of shredders and passing discards through them beforehand became routine. They're still doing the latter -- is it nothing more than the momentum of tradition lingering or is there yet some mitigated value to it?

On that note, information property can probably still be held-on to for a temporary period, and that's what the security should perhaps be marshalled around rather than doomed(?) prolongation. Just as it's not too bright to drop all the malware protection{*} on a device loaded with personal identity and accounts information, just because a data-harvesting infestation is going to get through eventually. "At least enjoy a little leisure space before leaping into hanging on by the fingertips."

- - - - - footnote - - - - -

{*} Corporate software itself is a Peeping-Tom, but maybe really does try to keep it anonymous enough to keep the world from falling apart.
Reply
#9
Zinjanthropos Offline
(Nov 27, 2020 06:00 PM)C C Wrote:
(Nov 27, 2020 05:05 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: What about the claims that Google is listening? What about Hackers? More sophisticated means of gathering intel then any former employee can offer...lol

Even Don Draper will be replaced by an AI program embodied in a social-interacting android someday, so the struggle to hang onto an autodidatic "natural" that the cocktail-drinking suits refined, polished, and invested time in will be a relic concern. 

Is smartdust already an outdated or unnecessary hope, to sprinkle around anywhere for eavesdropping or visual spying? Maybe it will be the microbot fly buzzing around in the meeting room, instead, which delivers the "skinny".

In prehistoric times there was browsing around in the waste paper baskets when no one was looking, before the existence of shredders and passing discards through them beforehand became routine. They're still doing the latter -- is it nothing more than the momentum of tradition lingering or is there yet some mitigated value to it?

On that note, information property can probably still be held-on to for a temporary period, and that's what the security should perhaps be marshalled around rather than doomed(?) prolongation. Just as it's not too bright to drop all the malware protection on  a device loaded with personal identity and accounts information, just because a data-harvesting infestation is going to get through eventually. "At least enjoy a little leisure space before leaping into hanging on by the fingertips."

Remember when you saw a satellite image of where you lived. It was cool but when the ability to zoom in real close came about you might get lucky and observe the beautiful neighbour nude sunbathing, super cool. Don't know how good those satellites are, can they read what you're reading by looking down over your shoulder? I don't think a satellite could listen in but I'm pretty sure a drone can or how about the simple basic bug installed in critical places. 

Waste baskets were great places for cleaning staff espionage so companies bought paper shredders. Is there a computer program that can emulate a paper shredder?
Reply
#10
C C Offline
(Nov 27, 2020 05:56 AM)Leigha Wrote: My employer requires non-compete agreements from all employees who interact with clients (my role), which basically states that you're not legally allowed to work for any competitor for up to one year, after leaving the firm. These often don't hold up in court, because most everyone I've known who has non-competes, have left companies to work for their competitors and haven't been sued. It's often not worth the court costs and energy to chase down former employees, but this isn't to say there aren't a few employers out there who wouldn't strongly consider suing past employees for violating their contracts. 

Interestingly, Trump wanted to put an end to non-competes, as well. I didn't realize until running across this article, that the President would have the authority to ban such agreements between employers and employees, in the private sector. What do you think? 

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/h...auses.aspx

Didn't feel it could be realistic if it was literally a complete and universal eradication:  "Biden will work with Congress to eliminate all non-compete agreements, except the very few that are absolutely necessary to protect a narrowly defined category of trade secrets..."

The devil is in what _X_ accompanies. Only one component of many in the whole union loving and union empowering policy package Biden promises: https://joebiden.com/empowerworkers/

Back to OA: "Should noncompetes be limited by a Biden administration, employers would have to consider new ways to protect their customer relationships, financial investments, business goodwill and confidential information," said Ana Dowell, an attorney in the Atlanta office of Ackerman.

Well, Ana, the enterprises actually hell-bent on survival will indeed recruit or discover those alternative ways, as they always do...

(Nov 27, 2020 06:16 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: Waste baskets were great places for cleaning staff espionage so companies bought paper shredders. Is there a computer program that can emulate a paper shredder?


Windows-wise, regularly deleting recycle bin helps deter the easy efforts, but files are often still recoverable for a while. There are "eraser" and "file shredder" apps that claim to permanently eradicate -- but the free ones may not be so effective.

When it comes to discarded hard drives that have been wiped, the only way to fully guarantee no data can be recovered is to physically destroy the magnetic disk in the case. Solid state drives might have to be taken apart down to the chips themselves and smash the latter. (Physical destruction may arguably be on the paranoid side for everyday situations, though apt for governments, etc.)
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  UK to ban cellphones in schools? + Lawless London? + Islamism exploiting UK politics? C C 0 73 Feb 19, 2024 02:23 AM
Last Post: C C
  Nobody wants Biden to run again, except for Biden Magical Realist 4 163 Feb 12, 2023 09:38 AM
Last Post: Zinjanthropos
  Biden calls for weapons ban while freeing international arms dealer C C 4 281 Dec 12, 2022 12:37 AM
Last Post: Syne
Question Transgender troop ban likely to be reversed by Biden Leigha 5 189 Nov 16, 2020 06:20 AM
Last Post: C C
  Biden plans these 5 executive orders Magical Realist 11 435 Nov 15, 2020 09:13 AM
Last Post: Syne



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)