Lighting a Fire Under Your Prospects.

[PA Bill]

Yep I know him, couple of people with him when he left Dixie tried to start another company, they got the hell sued out of them...then he landed at Taylor, pretty nice guy actually. I threw them out years before he was there lol. But I did end up buying from a guy that was a little more laid back, and yes he made his one call close with me

Yes. Joe is a good man. One of the best bosses I ever had. He taught me how to really close. There is a lesson in there for all seeking to go independent (in any business). One, be sufficiently capitalized (or the old "120% of nothing" saying will likely ring true ). And two, non-competes are no joke. If someone decides to enforce one, it will stop you in your tracks. I once heard of a group of employee recruiters here in Philly who were forced to set up shop and commute to Harrisburg by train (or two hour drive by car) daily for a year to ride out the waiting period until they could come back home.

 

[Gooner]

And two, non-competes are no joke. If someone decides to enforce one, it will stop you in your tracks. I once heard of a group of employee recruiters here in Philly who were forced to set up shop and commute to Harrisburg by train (or two hour drive by car) daily for a year to ride out the waiting period until they could come back home.

This makes absolutely no sense. All enforceable No-competes have a time component(which you mention) and a 'reasonable' geographic restriction. In most cases anything over a 5 mile radius will get it kicked, but I've seen up to 10 miles in some cases. To say some had to take a train to work hours away, seems a but ridiculous. But again, that's not the point...I've fought many no competes in my time both for and against.

 

[VolAgent]

This makes absolutely no sense. All enforceable No-competes have a time component(which you mention) and a 'reasonable' geographic restriction. In most cases anything over a 5 mile radius will get it kicked, but I've seen up to 10 miles in some cases. To say some had to take a train to work hours away, seems a but ridiculous. But again, that's not the point...I've fought many no competes in my time both for and against.

As I'm sure you know, the company doesn't have to win. Many can't afford the time and expense of fighting an invalid non-compete.

The worst I have heard of is a Jimmy John's, in Maryland I believe, having their employees sign a non-compete so they can't go work at another sandwich shop for two years. Who knew making a sub was so difficult?

 

[Gooner]

As I'm sure you know, the company doesn't have to win. Many can't afford the time and expense of fighting an invalid non-compete. The worst I have heard of is a Jimmy John's, in Maryland I believe, having their employees sign a non-compete so they can't go work at another sandwich shop for two years. Who knew making a sub was so difficult?

I just deleted a much longer post. To sum that deleted post up, most companies never pursue legal action for fear of the counter suit. Which can be substantial.

But, yes...you are correct. You don't have to 'win' a lawsuit to necessarily WIN a lawsuit. One of my first attorneys taught me that back in 2001.

 

[JoshC]

I just deleted a much longer post. To sum that deleted post up, most companies never pursue legal action for fear of the counter suit. Which can be substantial.

But, yes...you are correct. You don't have to 'win' a lawsuit to necessarily WIN a lawsuit. One of my first attorneys taught me that back in 2001.

If you're starting your own business, you probably lack the resources to fight it. If you take a job working for a competitor, they will generally term you if they get an attorney letter regarding the non-compete. The company I left last year actually put that in writing, made all new hires sign that they are not currently under a non-compete. The one I signed with them was for one year and 80 miles. Didn't mind because they were paying me very well to manage for them and I knew if I left it would be for another industry. I had sort of burned out on the Tin Man deal.

 

[VolAgent]

If you're starting your own business, you probably lack the resources to fight it. If you take a job working for a competitor, they will generally term you if they get an attorney letter regarding the non-compete. The company I left last year actually put that in writing, made all new hires sign that they are not currently under a non-compete. The one I signed with them was for one year and 80 miles. Didn't mind because they were paying me very well to manage for them and I knew if I left it would be for another industry. I had sort of burned out on the Tin Man deal.

If it was a bogus non-compete, that would make the countersuit so much better.

Most non-competes aren't worth the paper they are written on. The scope as far as time and geography are unreasonable, also there was no consideration made for the non-compete.

Now, non-disclosures and non-solicitations are a completely different matter.

 

[Gooner]

Now, non-disclosures and non-solicitations are a completely different matter.

Yuuuuuuuuuuup! .

 

[rousemark]

If it was a bogus non-compete, that would make the countersuit so much better.

Most non-competes aren't worth the paper they are written on. The scope as far as time and geography are unreasonable, also there was no consideration made for the non-compete.

Now, non-disclosures and non-solicitations are a completely different matter.

An insurance company cannot keep you from selling insurance through other companies if you leave...That was settled by the courts long ago.. That is the reason most insurance company non compete contract clauses address two specific actions.. You cannot disclose proprietary information, client lists, etc. and you cannot solicit people with whom you came in contact through your association with the company. Violation of either of these items is easily enforceable in court.

 

[VolAgent]

An insurance company cannot keep you from selling insurance through other companies if you leave...That was settled by the courts long ago.. That is the reason most insurance company non compete contract clauses address two specific actions.. You cannot disclose proprietary information, client lists, etc. and you cannot solicit people with whom you came in contact through your association with the company. Violation of either of these items is easily enforceable in court.

What you described are non-disclosures and non-solicitations, which are perfectly valid. A company has every expectation that employees and independent contractors will not share its proprietary information. Also, you were paid for acquiring clients for the company, and it is reasonable you will not attempt to lure those clients away for a period of time.

For a non-compete to be valid, it needs to be reasonable. Both as to time and geography. Also, generally consideration must be paid. Most non-competes ignore all three and thus are invalid.

 

[PA Bill]

What you described are non-disclosures and non-solicitations, which are perfectly valid. A company has every expectation that employees and independent contractors will not share its proprietary information. Also, you were paid for acquiring clients for the company, and it is reasonable you will not attempt to lure those clients away for a period of time.

For a non-compete to be valid, it needs to be reasonable. Both as to time and geography. Also, generally consideration must be paid. Most non-competes ignore all three and thus are invalid.

This is what my former manager at Dixie and the recruiters did, absconded with all kinds of client files and proprietary information. They asked for a war, got one, and lost. Always thought non-disclosures, non-solicitations, and non-competes were all kind of the same thing. Guess not. Always learning something new here on the forum. Thanks fellas!