Re:Massachusetts gives workers new protections against nonco...
by dunpeal on Tuesday August 21, 2018 @03:03PM
(#17812697)
50% salary isn't adequate protection. Imagine taking a 50% salary cut to change jobs. Pretty much pulls the rug under any motivation to do that.
Of course, that's also 50% of base. For the type of well-performing employee against whom non-competes are typically enforced, that means you have to settle for 25% or less of your total comp.
I am not a lawyer either, but from what I've seen in states where compensation is required, non-compete comp is typically 100% of base.
Of course, bonus is still a huge factor.
Re:Massachusetts gives workers new protections against nonco...
by Retric on Tuesday August 21, 2018 @03:57PM
(#17813132)
Often the difference between 0$ and 1$ is vastly more than 1$ and 2$. Companies are happy to setup a non compete for free, but if they need to spend real money then that get's rid of the vast majority of cases.
The first (what you were discussing) prohibits non-competes completely for certain classes of employees (non-exempt, interns in school, employees terminated without cause or laid off).
The second applies to everyone else and has 8 requirements for a non-compete to be enforceable, including "the agreement includes a garden leave clause or other mutually-agreed upon consideration between the employer and the employee", where the garden clause includes at least 50% of the employee's wage! Of course, "other mutually-agreed upon consideration" could be something much less...
Also interesting: the law looks like it applies to any non-competes signed after October 1 - it starts in 10 days!
EDIT: IANAL
0: https://www.faircompetitionlaw.com/2018/08/06/massachusetts-...