Re:U.S. Moves to Bar Noncompete Agreements in Labor Contracts
by ericbarrett on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:02PM
(#34262828)
In some cases the total comp is less than 50% salary. Might be fine for some quant PhD to go from $1M to $250k, but if this "workaround" to enforcing non-competes becomes more popular and spreads to different fields you could see positions that go from (say) $80k + benefits to $40k without, with furlough enforced for a year. That would be devastating for a family with children.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:U.S. Moves to Bar Noncompete Agreements in Labor Contracts
by ipaddr on Thursday January 05, 2023 @12:28PM
(#34263291)
But the people you are concerned with are not paid 40k plus 40k bonus that can be clawed away they are paid 80k.
Bonuses are like options being worthwhile in that they are mostly out of your control. When I see a position pays 140,000 plus bonus which was almost 40,000 last year I know I can only count on 140,000 this year and if 40,000 happens to be awarded great.
Re:U.S. Moves to Bar Noncompete Agreements in Labor Contracts
by jacobr1 on Thursday January 05, 2023 @01:00PM
(#34263783)
This wouldn't be a widespread practice outside of fields with proprietary data, relationships, or trade secrets, which tend to have better compensation. The costs of having a non-working employee on the payroll, even at the $40k-level need to be worth it. It isn't going to be the case for a random grocery store manager or whatever that they are worth the costs.