Generally, are non-competes even enforceable? Especially in industries (like cloud providers) where there is a very small number of players.
'Amazon is suing a cloud employee who left for Google, rekindling the debate over non-compete agreements' https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/11/aws-case-against-worker-who-...
Both times the new company withdrew its employment offers. It is pretty terrible. It leaves the employee at a company they don't want to be at.
This was in Colorado and Texas FWIW
Not because the non-compete is scary, but because the potential new hire is clearly an idiot.
A potential hire might also open up about their casual drug use. Would that be points in their favor vs. the other candidate who might very well also take drugs but chooses to not advertise this irrelevant detail to potential employers?
And lying to your employer about things like drug use will get you fired faster than just about anything else.
Yes, I did start work in the basement of the Pentagon in 1989 for what was then the Defense Communications Agency. I will let you ascertain for yourself what I may have told them during that interview.
I think you know damn well that jobs requiring a security clearance are a special case. It really doesn’t make sense to bring this up in a general conversation about jobs.
> And lying to your employer about things like drug use will get you fired faster than just about anything else.
If your employer is the DoD, sure. If you work for a normal company, they’ll never find out unless you have a real problem (or are stupid enough to advertise it).
>it wasn't an issue of enforceability
I’m not backtracking on anything. Are you ok? If it wasn’t an issue of enforceability, I think we can reasonably assume that the noncompete was not enforceable. Unenforceability was the premise of this conversation, and that wasn’t introduced by me.
So I unterstand you made the leap that the nocompete is unenforceable and therefore no binding. That's a pretty big leap and also ignores the point. Enforceability is typically a grey area and decided by the courts, and therefore there is a risk associated with violating the nocompete (for employee and new employer), and many employers might want to avoid it. If you were referring to the case where the nocompete is clearly illegal (e.g. you're in california), yes there is no uncertainty, but then there is also no issue about disclosing it, because there is no associated risk. In that case I don't understand what you were trying to add to the discussion?
The current employer tracked down the new company after they gave notice, found the hiring manager, and started making threats ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Not having it in the first place is a way better solution.