Hey, there! Log in / Register
Legislature to consider elimination of non-compete contracts
By adamg on Wed, 12/17/2008 - 8:49am
Wade Roush reports that state Rep. Will Brownsberger of Cambridge and Arlington is filing legislation to forbid companies from including contract clauses that keep workers from working for competitors for at least a year.
Although it's a hot topic among tech workers, Brownsberger told Roush he's especially concerned about low-level service workers who effectively can't find work in the same industry even though they know none of the trade secrets the clauses are meant to protect.
Bijan Sabet is thrilled, argues the clauses put Massachusetts at a competitive disadvantage with states, such as California, that do not allow them.
Topics:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
non-compete clauses should be banned
I'm surprised MA still has these. Anyone who is concerned about the economic impact, the "risk" of employees leaving with trade secrets, etc. should look hard at Silicon Valley where the open migration of tech workers from company to company has been an ingredient in the success of that region. Especially in an economic downtown, we cannot afford to cling to limiting, conservative practices that stifle innovation.
I have to agree. As a tech
I have to agree. As a tech worker who's been directly affected by this myself, I find it fairly ridiculous, and a club that is too often wielded by employers to unfairly limit the jobs an ex-employee can take. I have co-workers who did have to quit a job and wait the year before taking a job at the competition.
There is a specific and limited use of this clause for one very narrow particular situation that I am OK with - when an employee has trade secrets or intellectual property they may be taking with them directly to the other employer, when the employer is a direct competitor and the employee is working in a directly analogous position.
But this has been used to ridiculous lengths for computer techs, where companies claim any and all internal processes and IP are confidential trade secrets (stuff like the ticket-entry system or Intranet). If you *wrote* the ticket entry system and are going to go duplicate it an another employer, then maybe.
Agreed, its silly and it
Agreed, its silly and it doesnt seem fair at all. I think , like you said, it makes sense in some situations but it shouldnt be used as extensive as it is. In this economic climate we dont need any more walls between people and happy employment.
Bay State != Bay Area
Agreed that non-compete clauses should generally not be used.
Blatant theft of IP, clients, etc., is what should be discouraged.
However, I wouldn't totally use Silicon Valley as a model. Their tech culture is substantially different than Boston's, and in some ways Boston's is better. For example, my feel is that Silicon Valley people are less likely to be loyal to a project or organization, jumping ship as soon as an immediately better opportunity comes along.