Re:Resistance to Noncompete Agreements Is a Win for Workers
by drpgq on Sunday May 19, 2019 @01:22PM
(#19954337)
I'm surprised more states and provinces don't take the example of California as a guide for non-competes. Places are always trying to create their own Silicon whatever which is obviously easier said than done, but getting rid of non-competes is one thing that can be done.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Resistance to Noncompete Agreements Is a Win for Workers
by jjeaff on Sunday May 19, 2019 @02:39PM
(#19954723)
I don't think getting rid of non-competes would necessarily attract companies to your silicon-whatever.
Re:Resistance to Noncompete Agreements Is a Win for Workers
by DeRock on Sunday May 19, 2019 @04:13PM
(#19955231)
Silicon Valley isn’t what it is because it attracted companies, it’s a hot bed because it empowers people to start their own.
Re:Resistance to Noncompete Agreements Is a Win for Workers
by dredmorbius on Sunday May 19, 2019 @03:02PM
(#19954828)
It's talent, not employers, in short supply.
Re:Resistance to Noncompete Agreements Is a Win for Workers
by ironmagma on Sunday May 19, 2019 @04:00PM
(#19955162)
Not really true. The whole existence of a “brain drain” indicates that the places the workers are coming from have insufficient opportunities.
Re:Resistance to Noncompete Agreements Is a Win for Workers
by dredmorbius on Sunday May 19, 2019 @06:09PM
(#19955841)
Which results in talent being in short supply.
The talent is both better rewarded and considered and treated elsewhere.
It's quite possible for talent to depart locations based on nonfinancial considerations, or considerations with indirect financial effects, as with noncompetes. The Great Migration and Jewish refugee migration (1920s-50s, and later, Europe) are cases in point.
On multiple grounds, California ~1960 - 2000 offerred both better compensation and better considerations for technical talent. The pendulum is swinging based on a few factors, notably housing costs an conditions.