Should My Daughter Seek Legal Counsel?

[Texas Proud]

if ours said we couldn't work for a competitor I wouldn't sign it - no one else would either

With the companies I worked for, if you did not sign you were let go... so, it is your choice not to sign... their choice not to employ you....

As for the one that I dealt with when I was a trustee, that was negotiated when the person was selling their company... so it was part of the purchase price....

 

[Big_Hitter]

With the companies I worked for, if you did not sign you were let go... so, it is your choice not to sign... their choice not to employ you....

As for the one that I dealt with when I was a trustee, that was negotiated when the person was selling their company... so it was part of the purchase price....

none of "us" can get jobs (including self-employment) outside the industry (unless we go to work for a client but that's very rare for a seasoned professional) so it would be financial suicide to sign one that prohibits employment with a competitor

we are similar to lawyers in that regard except that atty-client privilege allows attorneys to take their clients with them

we are in pretty high demand so refusing to sign isn't that big of a deal - however, no one in our business has noncompetes that prohibit employment with competitors

 

[someguy]

Dog, non-compete agreements are valid. If your DD signed one, and it is legitimate, she needs to comply with the terms. That said, non-compete agreements do not mean someone cannot work, and what constitutes "compete" requires careful consideration. An employment attorney can help a great deal in situation like this.

It would be interesting to see if her former employer can produce the original signed agreement. Many companies don't have files in that good order.

One wrinkle to consider (that I don't think was mentioned) is any agreement she signed at the new employer. Smart employers have new employees sign an agreement that includes language to the effect that they are not under a relevant non-compete.

 

[Big_Hitter]

One wrinkle to consider (that I don't think was mentioned) is any agreement she signed at the new employer. Smart employers have new employees sign an agreement that includes language to the effect that they are not under a relevant non-compete.

how would that invalidate an existing noncompete?

 

[someguy]

how would that invalidate an existing noncompete?

It wouldn't. I was pointing it out as a potential additional risk to OP's DD. If former employer are indeed jerks and serious about lawsuits, they may very well file against OP's DD and her new employer (who has deeper pockets?). If she promised new employer in writing that she didn't have any non-competes that would prevent her from working for them and it turns out she in fact did/does, that would not be good for her.

 

[Texas Proud]

none of "us" can get jobs (including self-employment) outside the industry (unless we go to work for a client but that's very rare for a seasoned professional) so it would be financial suicide to sign one that prohibits employment with a competitor

we are similar to lawyers in that regard except that atty-client privilege allows attorneys to take their clients with them

we are in pretty high demand so refusing to sign isn't that big of a deal - however, no one in our business has noncompetes that prohibit employment with competitors

I guess I should say it was for 12 or 24 months...

 

[bingybear]

I knew a guy who worked a co-op job in college that had him sign one of these agreements. It held up starting his first job after college. Usually one of the questions involves do you have anything the could limit your ability to perform your work... or sometimes straight out asking for these agreements.

His first job after school would not let him start until this agreement from the co-op was sorted. They got the co-op employer to release him from the obligations. But these were two good companies.

On not signing, the companies I worked at... you were just out the door. We even had to sign new ones when we got bought out several times.

The unfortunate thing is that they don't show these until you're being processed into the company

 

[dkarst]

I've been through this a couple times in technology and started with the position "sure I'll sign a balanced non-compete agreement where the term is precisely this same as my severance payment". That usually got things back into balance for the RIF part. As for leaving for a competitor, you have to just get it as narrow as possible... i.e. manufacturer of circuit boards in the medical industry, not manufacturer of any sort of widgets.

 

[M Paquette]

I'm in California, and once had an employer insist that I sign their non-compete agreement. Heh.

I signed: my-name "per California Business and Professions Code 16600"

16600. Except as provided in this chapter, every contract by which anyone is restrained from engaging in a lawful profession, trade, or business of any kind is to that extent void.

 

[Ronstar]

1. No serious lawyer communicates with an email.. A touch of harassment is all it is. Under no circumstances respond in anyway.
2. Talk to a lawyer ...you'll sleep better.
3. I believe non competes are difficult to enforce..
4. Inform the boss


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum.

+2. All good advice. I had a non-compete clause, and my lawyer also told me that non competes are difficult to enforce. That said, I would get a lawyer involved and get the new company boss involved. If DD is using the past company client list to secure clients for the new company, then the new company is involved already.


Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

 

[harley]

When my company wanted me to sign a non-compete (and this was after I'd been working there a few years in the same job), I got creative

They made the mistake of sending the document out as an MS Word document, so I simply changed a few words, printed it out and signed it, and kept an original signed copy. It's amazing how inserting 'not' or switching 'days' for 'months' will help your cause. I made sure the word wrap didn't change, so when I handed it to HR, they just stuck it in my file.

So if they had sent me something like what they sent the OP, I would send them a registered letter asking for a copy of the agreement I signed. When I got that, I'd say "But I did wait 18 days, as specified in the document!" It never came to that since they moved their operation offshore and sent me packing.

I was required to sign a number of forms that I didn't agree with, over the decades with megacorp. I often would strike out words or phrases (with a pen), or write "not" or "I don't agree" or something on the forms. Almost every time they were accepted and put wherever they put those things. I don't think anybody ever even looked at them. Just cya stuff, for the most part.

 

[Taxman59]

Years ago, the CPA firm I was working for required all employees to sign a non-compete agreement. We were told that failure to sign was a firing offense. In NC, several people signed, even though they were planning to leave and take clients. When the firm came after them, the judge gave a summary judgement in favor of the employees (and legal fees!) since there was no compensation for signing. Continued employment in NC is not valid compensation. Every NC employee got a $100 check when we signed the new contracts 6 months later! My point is that state laws are different, and if the former company used an out of state agreement, it may have faults that will render it invalid.


Have the day you deserve, and let Karma sort it out.

Sent from my iPad using Early Retirement Forum

 

[Big_Hitter]

It wouldn't. I was pointing it out as a potential additional risk to OP's DD. If former employer are indeed jerks and serious about lawsuits, they may very well file against OP's DD and her new employer (who has deeper pockets?). If she promised new employer in writing that she didn't have any non-competes that would prevent her from working for them and it turns out she in fact did/does, that would not be good for her.

Ah understood!

 

[Big_Hitter]

I guess I should say it was for 12 or 24 months...

even then that would prevent me from working for 1 or 2 years - I still wouldn't sign it

 

[Brat]

Previous posters have identified the weakness of non-competes and given excellent advise about dealing with this. Basically find a Pit Bull lawyer to attack the former employer.

 

[Dog]

DD's attorney sent a letter to former employer attorney asking for copy of signed non-compete document and proof of their claims that she took the client list and has stolen clients/business. Also informed them that she is not working for a competitor.
The former employer attorney provided the document daughter signed but nothing else except to ask for the name of DD new employer.
DD's attorney called and spoke to former employer attorney. Stated that due to past aggressive behavior of former employer, DD has not authorized to provide name of new employer, but assures that it is not a competitor.
The former employer could not provide any proof of their claims against DD and admitted it was based on rumors.

DD attorney said its done, they have nothing and not to worry about it.

DD did speak to her manager. Her manager's response was, " what a jerk!" and told DD not to worry about it.

So, it appears to be over. Just 72 hours of hell.




Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum

 

[Meadbh]

Yay!

As I said, sometimes you need an expert lawyer. Money well spent. Problem over.

 

[growing_older]

The former employer attorney provided the document daughter signed but nothing else except to ask for the name of DD new employer.

So all that bluster about working for a competitor and stealing clients was outright fabrication because in fact the old employer had no idea who she was working for now.

It seems like that kind of aggressive threat without any basis to stand on should be punishable in some way. Too bad it's better for your daughter to just let them go away.

 

[Rick_Head]

DD's attorney sent a letter to former employer attorney asking for copy of signed non-compete document and proof of their claims that she took the client list and has stolen clients/business. Also informed them that she is not working for a competitor.
The former employer attorney provided the document daughter signed but nothing else except to ask for the name of DD new employer.
DD's attorney called and spoke to former employer attorney. Stated that due to past aggressive behavior of former employer, DD has not authorized to provide name of new employer, but assures that it is not a competitor.
The former employer could not provide any proof of their claims against DD and admitted it was based on rumors.

DD attorney said its done, they have nothing and not to worry about it.

DD did speak to her manager. Her manager's response was, " what a jerk!" and told DD not to worry about it.

So, it appears to be over. Just 72 hours of hell.




Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum

I'm guessing DD's lawyer didn't work for free. I'd suggest that he ask former employer for costs.

 

[MooreBonds]

I'm guessing DD's lawyer didn't work for free. I'd suggest that he ask former employer for costs.

To do so would probably involve billings of a 0.1 hr phone call to her lawyer, 0.5 hr to draft a letter, 0.25 hr to read the former boss' reply, and 0.1 hr to call her up to discuss the reply.

I'm guessing they would simply say "We never told you you had to hire a lawyer, we simply told you that you are not to be using your lists or stealing old clients. It was your decision to pay someone to represent you." All for another 1.0 hr of billings.

 

[sheehs1]

Yay! Money well spent and I am glad it was solved with the one letter and phone call. By getting an attorney involved, she let the former employer and employer's lawyer know she would fight if need be.

 

[travelover]

.............It seems like that kind of aggressive threat without any basis to stand on should be punishable in some way..............

I know a couple of guys that will break his arm for $100

 

[bingybear]

These agreements do have a place in business. The last couple I signed were for small companies that defined the technological area they were protecting (not anything a mega corp does in any division), customer list, vendor lists, poaching people, not using other companies IP.

I know a local small company that hired a design engineer from a mega corp in a similar industry. The engineer used technology from the mega corp in a product and created a law suit between the two companies which ended up bankrupting the small company.

I never changed jobs to what I thought were similar companies, but I was often concerned by how broad the mega corp restrictions were.

glad this is over for DD. These agreements should not be used to prevent one from earning a living

 

[karen1972]

Glad she got a lawyer, hope it is resolved quickly. Given what she does, I could see overlap in customers and even vendors.. Most people have to sign the non-compete jobs.. there are always ways around them... normally working with other customers/vendors for a period of time so your not in direct non-compete even though you work for a competitor.

I will have to say I'm also surprised they went after her (unless they lost lots of clients which certainly could drive that) as most people under Director are really considered non players unless you break a patent or clearly caught transferring customer lists, pricing, roadmaps, etc.

 

[pb4uski]

....It seems like that kind of aggressive threat without any basis to stand on should be punishable in some way. Too bad it's better for your daughter to just let them go away.

+1 I'm more of a prick and would then go after those jerks for entertainment... like some sort of counterclaim for harassment. Perhaps her lawyer would take it on for fun... I know I might if I were him.