Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • It varies (Score:2, Informative)

    The enforceability of these clauses varies state-by-state. I believe that in some states they are completely unenforceable but you still see them because employees don't know this and are cowed into acting in line with their provisions.
    • Makes sense that it varies from state to state. But, in states that it is enforcable, how can it be "enforced"?

      If the employer is in Oklahoma and your in NY, can Oklahoma law enforce it on the person in NY?

      In this case, I'm a consultant, so wouldn't be cowed in being in line with it, and won't even sign it. If I were a W2, I would. Especially since the provision says it will pay 80% of your salary if you can't find new employment because of the provision. That, I hadn't seen before and is fairly programme
      • Re:It varies (Score:2, Informative)

        by jordan (120) on 2003.12.20 11:37 (#26723) Homepage Journal
        IANAL. But, I think that these non-competes usually contemplate that you'll be competing locally against them.

        It's not a crime to break these anyway, it's civilly actionable. So, in your example, you might be sued in a Oklahoma court. I think what happens if you lose and don't comply can be very complicated and varies, here it comes, from state to state. I think often, you can just ignore civil judgements in other states. They can seize any property you have in the state in which you lost. I believe that for large judgements (think OJ Simpson) states enforce each others' civil judgements, but I'm not sure how that works.