Legal advice: non-compete agreement

[Comin' in Hot]

I started working for a sales organization on the premise that I was going to sell a specific brand product. After being there for approximately 60-90 days, I was informed that the company was going to sell a competing product. The ownership was in talks with a competing brand to switch directions and sell their product at the time I was hired or before. If I was aware of this change I would have taken a different career path, but the ownership couldn't legally tell me. At the time of the change, I was stuck, I already missed the deadline to apply for the program I returned to school to complete and the new sales organization for the original product was not hiring full-time. I signed a non-compete letter when I was hired thinking I was going to sell one product not the other.

My question is: What legal grounds do I have to dismiss this non- complete letter due to this change?

[Ms. Denmark]

I'm not a lawyer but I know who "plays" ;) one on MM.net. Seriously, my advice is to PM Martyo.

[Bluerauder]

I agree with Ms. Denmark that you need to gather all of the relevant facts and documents/paperwork surrounding your hiring and have a lawyer provide some professional advice.

Seems to me that this falls under "Changed Conditions" and that you were not made completely aware of all the facts before you signed the Non- Compete Agreement.

1. Exactly what does the Non-Compete Agreement say? What are your specific rights and limitations?
2. You say that you were hired "on the premise" of selling a particular product. Do you have anything in writing that says that? Alternatively, did your hiring manager say anything specifically with regard to that premise. Can you prove it? Are there any witnesses to that promise?
3. If the "premise" was more of an assumption on your part rather than actually promises or statements from the company/hiring manager, you may have a hard time proving your point.
4. Regardless, you signed a Non-Compete Agreement without the benefit of all the information necessary to make an informed decision. The company had information that was relevant to your decision. However, they did not provide you with ALL of the facts for whatever reason (legal or otherwise).
5. My assessment is that the Non-Compete Agreement is not valid since you were not aware and could not know of the impending "change in conditions".
6. You will need to put together a factual case to prove your point.
7. Getting professional legal help will likely be one of your first steps.
8. Personally, I'd be highly skeptical about working for such a company in the future that withholds important and relevant information from its employees. Start looking elsewhere for employment in a company that doesn't have questionable business ethics. JMHO.

[MMBLUE]

I had a similar situation. I worked for a company in an area and the non compete I signed was; not to disclose proprieitary company information and sell within an "X" mile radius. When my previous company knew that I was working for a local competitor, they did legal posturing between the two companies. Bottom line for me; I couldn't sell in the area that they were aware of. If I got caught, who knows. I ended up doing crew management/ job coordination and sold other things that the other company didn't have. Basically, I WAS SCREWED, and couldn't change the outcome. The damage was done when I signed it.

[Bluerauder]

I had a similar situation.

I don't see the similarity at all. Other than the use of Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreements, the situation you describe is completely different. In your case you signed the agreement, then went to work for a competing company. You changed the conditions. This is exactly why the NDA and NCA was put in place.

[MMBLUE]

I don't see the similarity at all. Other than the use of Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreements, the situation you describe is completely different. In your case you signed the agreement, then went to work for a competing company. You changed the conditions. This is exactly why the NDA and NCA was put in place.

Bottom line; Signed non compete = Screwed. To me, that's similar. Not the story or circumstances just " non compete "

[PonyUP]

I work for a company that uses non competes and in my position I am very involved with the process.

There is almost always a way to bust a non compete. Sometimes it's just a title change or a minor change in responsibilities.

In my world, due to the expense, we only enforce non competes on RVP and above or when a vital contract is at stake.

If you are middle management and it doesn't have a huge impact on their business, they are most likely not going to enforce, unless somebody does it out of spite.

Non competes are extremely hard to enforce, and most fizzle out in a court case due to situations just like this. When someone is trained on something and their role changes, a company doesn't have a right to keep you from working. Most of the time it's just used as a scare tactic. They are written in very general terms for a reason, so that you have the flexibility to work around it.

Now if you have an extremely detailed non compete, pm Martyo because that is something different


The Ice Bucket Approves of this message

[MMBLUE]

I work for a company that uses non competes and in my position I am very involved with the process.

There is almost always a way to bust a non compete. Sometimes it's just a title change or a minor change in responsibilities.

In my world, due to the expense, we only enforce non competes on RVP and above or when a vital contract is at stake.

If you are middle management and it doesn't have a huge impact on their business, they are most likely not going to enforce, unless somebody does it out of spite.

Non competes are extremely hard to enforce, and most fizzle out in a court case due to situations just like this. When someone is trained on something and their role changes, a company doesn't have a right to keep you from working. Most of the time it's just used as a scare tactic. They are written in very general terms for a reason, so that you have the flexibility to work around it.

Now if you have an extremely detailed non compete, pm Martyo because that is something different


The Ice Bucket Approves of this message

Very well put PonyUp, hence my statement if I got caught :confused:. Other than Lawyer letters back and forth and legal scare jargon of potential outcome if caught; changing position identity, and duties will usually skirt the issue.

[Ozark Marauder]

I had a strange thing happen when I was out-processing from the Air Force. I worked on, calibrated, and was a trainer on several guidance and control test equipment sets for a particular aircraft and missile system. I had to sign a document stating I would not travel to a list of particular countries, for a year, and not work in this specific field for the same list of countries for three years. Ten year / $10,000.00 fine or both.

Anybody else run into these documents during out-processing? Sorry a bit :Offtopic:. Just wondering.

OZ

[J-MAN]

What does the attorney who approved the non-compete agreement before you signed it have to say?

[N40GL]

Employment law is not my area, but I do recall this:

1. Non competes are governed by state law and, as such, the rules vary state to state.

2. If I recall correctly, for a non compete to be valid, you have to be specifically compensated for it (in other words, you have to be paid to restrict your right to seek work).

It would be interesting to learn the terms of the N/C agreement - what, exactly, does it profess to prevent you from doing? Ever working for a sales organization? Ever selling an equivalent product (and, given the product history you describe, that sounds shaky since the products were moving around)? Ever working in Idaho?

Of course, the first thing I'd do would be to ask the senior-most executive at the company (with whom you were in contact) to see if they plan to enforce the N/C. Under the circumstances, they may choose to void it voluntarily (especially after you recite the story above).

Don't reach for a lawyer just yet - "don't bleed before you're shot."

And, of course, free advice (mine included) is worth what you pay for it.

[sailsmen]

I think for the most part non-competes are the equivalent to endentured servitude.
I understand the necessity of non-disclosure agreements. I also understand when an owner sells a business the buyer may require a NC.

Just the word "non-compete" says it all, the antithesis of America.

In many NC both parties agree to do certain things. Frequently both parties alleged the other did not "comply".

None of the companies I have owned have required a NC, nor will they ever. Several of the companies that I have worked for have required them.

As an employee I have disputed 2 NC. I one case they ended up paying me and in the other case neither party collected damages but I ended up with all the clients, which just show how stupid they are, ( the NC and the Company for thinking they "own" the client").

Weird - I posted last nite and it disappeared. Most States have Legislation outling limitations such as geography and time. Many are outdated and poorly worded. A good labor attorney can tell you what your obligations are for ~$500. Do not wait for legal advice, get it before you speak or make any moves. Beleive it will save you mega bucks latter becasue you can't undo what you say or do.

[Comin' in Hot]

Thanks everyone for the advice, I'm going to sit down with my boss/ owner of company and try to work out my frustrations. Hopefully it won't come to me trying to leave. He's going to have to be somewhat flexible. Unfortunately he's not in the position to lose me because I do everything for him and I'm his only employee.