Last week I wrote about Massachusetts legislation to ban noncompetes. As I wrote, from our position of representing businesses, we do not have an inherent preference for or against noncompetes because there are business interests on either side of the issues (as the Massachusetts debate illustrates). Rather, our job is to guide clients through the changing and varied rules across the states about noncompetes. However, I do feel that opponents of noncompetes often make statements about the prevalence of noncompetes, the decline of noncompetes, and the effect of noncompetes on the economy that are not always supported by data. The statements may be right and they may be wrong, I just can’t always tell from the information provided. Reader Cimarron Buser reached out with some thoughtful comments about the post that I will summarize briefly, then invite him or any reader to comment further to elaborate as desired. I quoted an article where the author said he had “heard” about a noncompete preventing a teenage camp counselor from switching camps. Mr. Buser sent me an e-mail and a link to an article about such a noncompete – signed by his daughter! As I understand it, the enforceability of the noncompete was not actually litigated, but another employer declined to hire young Ms. Buser because of a noncompete with another camp. The article includes comments from the employer who required the noncompete with their point of view, including that the noncompete restricts employment only within a 10-mile radius. I don’t know enough about the specifics to comment about the substance; certainly we can agree that a noncompete for a 19-year-old summer employee is unusual. But the point I want to highlight for readers from Mr. Buser’s correspondence is that noncompetes are sometimes de facto enforced outside of court because a prospective employer does not want to deal with the headache of possible litigation. That is certainly true. Indeed, there are employers who know their noncompetes may not be enforceable in whole or in part and/or have no intention of spending money to litigate over them, and they simply hope that employees and/or subsequent employers are sufficiently intimidated to observe them. That is certainly an option, and as a matter of public policy it seems reasonable to legislatively try to address that scenario in particular. I think the article suffers from some of the anecdotal-ism referred to in my original post, but it’s by a very highly regarded legal journalist (and I’m certainly not suggesting there is anything inaccurate in it, I just question whether the examples therein are representative of the universe). We certainly welcome the dialogue.
RELATED ARTICLES
Six Statements That May Mean Your Business Will Keep an Employment Lawyer Busy
June 1, 2017 | Employment Lessons, Currents - Employment Law
Illinois Cracks Down on Non-competes for Low-Wage Workers
September 7, 2016 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
State Noncompete Statutes, Your Company, and the Economy: One Perspective
February 29, 2016 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Groundhog Day: Declaring the Impending Death of Massachusetts Noncompetes
February 8, 2016 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Pennsylvania Supreme Court “Considers” Noncompetes: Mere Continued Employment Not Enough
November 19, 2015 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Six Statements That May Mean Your Business Will Keep an Employment Lawyer Busy
June 1, 2017 | Employment Lessons, Currents - Employment Law
Illinois Cracks Down on Non-competes for Low-Wage Workers
September 7, 2016 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
State Noncompete Statutes, Your Company, and the Economy: One Perspective
February 29, 2016 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Groundhog Day: Declaring the Impending Death of Massachusetts Noncompetes
February 8, 2016 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Pennsylvania Supreme Court “Considers” Noncompetes: Mere Continued Employment Not Enough
November 19, 2015 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Noncompete Roundup – Florida
November 7, 2015 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Noncompete Roundup – Oklahoma
November 6, 2015 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Noncompetes In Mexico
October 13, 2015 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Think Before You Shoot on Noncompete: Why The Threatening Letter May Not Be Your First Move
October 12, 2015 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
An Annual Ritual: Massachusetts Noncompete Legislation
July 1, 2015 | High Stakes Employment Issues, Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Did California Just Fire No-Employment Provisions From Settlement Agreements?
April 13, 2015 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Some HR Numbers That Should Be Zero In Your Organization
February 16, 2015 | Letter of the Law, Currents - Employment Law
Five Things to Know About Trade Secrets
December 22, 2014 | Letter of the Law, Currents - Employment Law
Five Distinctive Things About Ohio and Employment Law
November 10, 2014 | Letter of the Law, Currents - Employment Law
Beware of the court of public opinion
October 28, 2014 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Confidentiality & Nondisclosure Agreements Are No Substitute For Noncompetes
October 27, 2014 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Opinions About Noncompetes: Actual Supporting Data Not Required
June 23, 2014 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
It’s Back: Proposal to Ban Massachusetts Noncompetes (and Related Economic Theories)
April 14, 2014 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Employers, You All Have Secrets: New Report Might Help You Protect Them
April 6, 2014 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Have You Double-Checked The Language Of Your Non-Compete Lately? If Not, You Need To...
March 26, 2014 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Behind “Obnoxious” Headlines, A Good Noncompete Strategy Reminder
March 18, 2014 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
There Were No Mice Available? Testing Noncompetes and Motivation in Settings That Don’t Sound Much Like Employment
February 17, 2014 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Split Decision: Top 5 Noncompete Stories Lean Slightly in Favor of Enforcement
February 3, 2014 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Different Strokes for Different Folks (or Red, Blue, and Purple-Pencil America): How The 50 States Differ On Revising Non-Competes
January 3, 2014 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Coast to Coast Noncompete Part 2: Still Going in 3 Courts in 2 States
December 23, 2013 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
December Is Noncompete Month in the General Media
December 16, 2013 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Coast-to-Coast Noncompete Dispute Highlights 3 Key Enforcement Strategies
October 22, 2013 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Governor Would Like Massachusetts to Join California As a Non-Noncompete State
September 16, 2013 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
State Lines May Not Be When It Comes to Noncompetes
September 3, 2013 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Do You Have Restrictive Covenants In Texas? If So, Be Careful What You Ask For
August 30, 2013 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
Ohio Supreme Court Reverses Self on Noncompete in Merger Situation
October 11, 2012 | Non-competes and Trade Secrets, Currents - Employment Law
RELATED PRACTICE AREAS
Subscribe
Do you want to receive more valuable insights directly in your inbox? Visit our subscription center and let us know what you're interested in learning more about.
View Subscription Center