Introduction
Non-compete clauses are a common feature in employment agreements, intended to protect companies from employee poaching and maintaining a competitive edge. However, the enforceability of these clauses can vary significantly based on geographical location, the terms of the agreement, and the individual circumstances of the employee, including the nature of their previous experience. In this article, we examine the complexities surrounding non-compete clauses and discuss how they are often deemed enforceable but increasingly challenged due to their potential to cause hardship for the employee.
Enforceability of Non-Compete Clauses
Non-compete clauses, which typically prohibit an employee from working for a competitor within a certain time frame and geographic area, were traditionally held to be enforceable in most jurisdictions. However, recent legal trends are moving towards a more nuanced view that takes into account the impact on the employee. This is particularly true in states where judges and lawmakers are beginning to recognize the preposterous and harsh nature of such clauses.
Legal Challenges to Non-Compete Clauses
Several key legal challenges to non-compete clauses highlight the evolving nature of their enforceability:
Hardship to the Employee: Clauses that prevent an employee from working in their field of expertise, essentially locking them out of employment, are often found to be unenforceable. For instance, a recent case demonstrated that a non-compete clause was deemed unenforceable due to the significant hardship it imposed on the employee.
Unequal Agreement Setup: Courts have increasingly found non-compete clauses to be unenforceable when there is an imbalance in the setup of the agreement, further highlighting the argument that such clauses can be abusive.
Unlawful Purpose: Agreements that render someone unable to engage in any employment, anywhere, are considered unlawful and are generally void. The landmark case United States v. Biloxi 219, 691 S.D. Miss. 1963, affirmed 326 F.2d 237 5th Cir. 1964, cert. den. 379 U.S. 929 1965, set a clear precedent that agreements that destroy a person's ability to work are void.
Trends in Non-Compete Clauses
The enforceability of non-compete clauses is also influenced by state laws. Some states continue to enforce such clauses under the rationale that the employee agreed and signed them. However, other states, particularly those with a strong tradition of protecting employee rights, hold non-compete clauses unenforceable, especially when they prevent individuals from obtaining employment after unemployment or public assistance.
Duration of Non-Compete Clauses
Non-compete clauses are typically valid for a limited period, with 24 months being a common limit. This limitation is to ensure that the employee is given an opportunity to find new employment after leaving the current job. For example, a popular weatherman who moved to another station faced a restriction of one year before he could appear on the new station. This demonstrates that non-compete clauses are not absolute and must be adhered to within a reasonable time frame.
Legal Advice and Professional Help
Given the complexities and potential hardship associated with non-compete clauses, it is crucial to seek legal advice from a currently licensed attorney who is experienced in labor law. Consulting with such an attorney is essential to understand your rights and duties under such agreements. Moreover, ethical rules encourage active, inactive, and retired licensed lawyers to provide guidance on these matters to non-lawyers.
Note: Legal advice from non-lawyers or disbarred individuals can be dangerous and often misleading, and in many states, it is considered a violation of law.
Source: