- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Our small Gov telling businesses what they cant do Noncompete clauses in crosshairs
Posted on 1/8/23 at 5:45 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 1/8/23 at 5:45 pm to SlowFlowPro
Not what I said at all.
In an at-will employment state, the vast majority of employees do not have an employment agreement that spells out liquidated damages for the employee (severance or buyout) should the employer choose to terminate the contract without cause. What I am saying is that if an employer wishes to have me agree to a NCA, they should also be bound on their end to pay me if they decide to end my employment. And the worst are the ones who release employees without cause, yet still enforce a NCA.
In an at-will employment state, the vast majority of employees do not have an employment agreement that spells out liquidated damages for the employee (severance or buyout) should the employer choose to terminate the contract without cause. What I am saying is that if an employer wishes to have me agree to a NCA, they should also be bound on their end to pay me if they decide to end my employment. And the worst are the ones who release employees without cause, yet still enforce a NCA.
2
Posted on 1/8/23 at 5:47 pm to Floyd Dawg
quote:
What I am saying is that if an employer wishes to have me agree to a NCA, they should also be bound on their end to pay me if they decide to end my employment.
In the absence of a written agreement to that effect? If so, why?
quote:
And the worst are the ones who release employees without cause, yet still enforce a NCA.
Those employees shouldn’t have signed an NCA allowing that.
This post was edited on 1/8/23 at 5:48 pm
Posted on 1/12/23 at 7:54 am to Floyd Dawg
quote:
What I am saying is that if an employer wishes to have me agree to a NCA, they should also be bound on their end to pay me if they decide to end my employment. And the worst are the ones who release employees without cause, yet still enforce a NCA.
Nope. Usually consideration (ie. Money) is given to the employee for signing the NC. Why should I pay you if you frick up or if the financial situation of the company changes and I have to let you go?
I have many NCs with a lot of my employees. Only one has been contested and the courts enforced the NC. Our NC is not draconian. It’s for a period of 1 year instead of 2, and it is very specific about geography and client base.
I could see the need for an employer to extend it to 2 years if serious trade secrets were involved, but for run of the mill “don’t poach my customers” 1 year is more than effective.
The fact that the Govt wants to get involved in this issue is just another version of eliminating gas stoves.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News