“Companies that care about protecting their important information should make creative arrangements that evolve with the law and offer strong remedies. Companies should also set their goals to help shape their agreements. Is the aim to prevent competition in general or with a particular company? Are there any concerns about the loss of customers or employees? And what do the restrictions on potential employees, customers and the company`s public say? Answers to these questions can help companies reach the right deal to protect their business. However, there may be good reasons to apply a non-competition clause. If an employer cannot be adequately protected by the combination of a non-solicitation agreement and a confidentiality agreement, or if an employer`s business interests (or vulnerability to competition from former employees) are sufficiently significant to warrant the restriction of the employee`s ability to earn a living, non-compete obligations may be a form of protection that deserves to be protected: to search. It`s important to make sure that any agreement you sign with an employee makes sense given the employee`s particular situation, their particular position in your company, the vulnerability your business would face if they joined a competitor, and the likely impact the non-compete obligation would have on them. For example, a court could refuse to apply even a six-month restriction on an employee`s ability to work on the grounds that the interruption of employment is too long in certain industries and would effectively prohibit the person from returning to work in that industry. “One of the most common mistakes startups make when introducing non-compete obligations is timing. In general, non-compete obligations (and other restrictive agreements) must be supported by consideration in order to be enforceable. When hiring a new employee, the offer of employment provides the necessary consideration to support the non-compete agreement. But startups often neglect to use employment contracts of any kind from the beginning, so it`s common for a startup to present non-compete agreements to employees after working on them for a while.

In this case, it is imperative that the startup takes additional considerations – usually in the form of an increase, bonus or promotion – to ensure that the non-competition clause is enforceable. The promise of job retention is not enough to support the non-compete obligation. The rate of business creation in the United States has fallen by 50 percent since the 1970s, according to a 2017 report by the Economic Innovation Group. There are many reasons for this decline, but it is certain that one factor that received little attention was the explosion of non-compete obligations. Public policies also support the mobility of workers in difficult labour markets. The applicability of non-compete obligations is determined by state law and there is no consensus on applicability. For example, California has banned the use of non-compete obligations in most circumstances, and other states have also discussed restricting the use of agreements. A startup should have a lawyer who evaluates the applicable law that governs its non-compete obligation. “There are better ways to protect your intellectual property. Non-compete obligations are dealt with in accordance with the commercial law of the State. This means that what works for an opponent will be different for each state, sometimes extremely different. In the modern world, where startups often have virtual employees in many different states, this creates problems.

The non-compete clause you write for employees in your home state may not be brought in the state court for your virtual employees. You can try to solve this problem with choice of law clauses, but these don`t always hold water. State courts generally have jurisdiction over people who work in their state, even if the companies they work for are not in the state. There are other provisions that could be used in an employment contract that may govern the protection of an employer`s confidential information and trade secrets. For example, non-disclosure agreements can protect employers` trade secrets, and confidential agreements can protect employers from the disclosure of confidential information by employees. Both agreements may also enter into force after the conclusion of an employment relationship. Non-disclosure agreements and confidential agreements are viewed more favorably by the courts because they do not restrict an employee`s future movements. This is not to say that the interests that employers want to protect are not essential. But it`s fair to say that an employee`s ability to make a living is usually a more compelling consideration. There are several reasons for this. One of the reasons for this is that, although the courts consider that the interests of some employers are legitimate (para.

B for example, the protection of confidential information or trade secrets and the protection of employees and customers from the recruitment of former employees), these interests can often be adequately protected by non-solicitation and confidentiality agreements (or non-disclosure agreements). .

About Author

blackk