Non Compete Clauses Ohio

[DaytonBuck]

How iron tight are these things? Could I realistically dare my current employer to sue me? Would they really go to court over it?

I have some legit leverage on my boss.

 

[Buckeye Buh Nim]

How iron tight are these things? Could I realistically dare my current employer to sue me? Would they really go to court over it?

I have some legit leverage on my boss.

I worked for an employer who did sue. I don't think he won, but we never knew for sure.

This was an employee who left as an instructor from one technical training firm to another.

I would guess that your level of knowledge wrt the companies primary business is key.

 

[DaytonBuck]

I worked for an employer who did sue. I don't think he won, but we never knew for sure.

This was an employee who left as an instructor from one technical training firm to another.

I would guess that your level of knowledge wrt the companies primary business is key.

I made it a point to position myself to get as much leverage on superiors as possible. I could get my boss in a couple felonies.

 

[FKAGobucks877]

Is your boss aware of this? Is he the one who would decide whether the company comes after you or not? What type of non-compete clause is it? Can't answer without this info. If your boss doesn't know you have the goods on him, then that won't effect the decision on whether to go after you. If he does, but it isn't his call on whether the company goes after you, then that also won't effect the decision. Even if he does know and it is his call, it may not matter, because your knowledge of a crime is simply an allegation, and if you don't have (or can't get) proof, then it will go away. Also, you pull out that card, and nobody in the business will touch you going forward.

If this clause is nothing but a "you can't tell our secrets" type of thing, you're probably fine...as long as the business practices of the second company don't change once you show up. Sounds to me like you'd be taking a pretty big risk. Most companies will sue, simply to make an example so nobody else tries the same shit.

 

[BuckeyeRyn]

is anyone else really disenchanted with how sue-happy this country has become... jeezlepete...

if you do this, I'll sue you.. yeah, well, if you sue me, I'll sue you... sounds like old people's way of duking it out on the playground...

rant over, hoping off soap box now... damn, I feel better..

 

[AKAK]

Just depends...

Are we talking a sales non-compete, where you're going to jump to a competitor and use your contacts at your current clients to get business for your new employer?

If you're breaking that... then what you have on your boss better be good.

Or, are we talking about something like what Buh Nim is talking about... where you have an expertise or are a consultant with a non compete contract for employment, those are a bit different in that this is a right to work state... so... if you're just gonna jump for a better salary... get fired.

(That doesn't negate the non-compete exactly, but, what are they gonna do, go to the judge and say, "Yeah, we fired him, now we want him to collect unemployment and starve?)

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

is anyone else really disenchanted with how sue-happy this country has become...

Not in the least.

 

[Buckeye Buh Nim]

if you're just gonna jump for a better salary... get fired.

(That doesn't negate the non-compete exactly, but, what are they gonna do, go to the judge and say, "Yeah, we fired him, now we want him to collect unemployment and starve?)

Oddly enough that is what my former employer did. Mind you he was a schmuck and there is a reason he is a former employer.

 

[Folanator]

Kinda depends what industry you work in. Banks will sue your ass and could win if there is a non-compete non-solicit in place and you go to the direct competition.

I know for a fact that 5/3, Key, Huntington, Nat City are agressive as hell. The contracts have been proven to hold up.

 

[NJ-Buckeye]

This post is worth exactly what you paid for it.. zero

Non-competes are toughest when there is truly something tangible that could be lost if the non-compete were enforced... if intellectual property or the sort were moved from one firm to a competing firm, it could objectively damage the firm you came from and aid the firm you are going to...

However, they cannot keep you from making a living... they may have to pay you for executing that non-compete.. ie pay you for the two years your non-compete is in effect...

Non-competes are big in the financial advisor world... but for the most part, these cases are better at creating 'space' and stalling than real impact... If the firm can stall you for a length of time to make whatever you have less valuable... they conceptually accomplish what they wanted... ie time to contact your clients and steal them away from you

Everything is for sale... have seen many non-competes dissolve at the negotiation table and money changes hands...

If the company has EVER let one 'violation' go, they're probably toast from ever winning one... they gotta be iron clad over ALWAYS going after 'violators'

Best is always have an attorney look at the contract to see how iron-clad it is...

 

[sandgk]

How iron tight are these things? Could I realistically dare my current employer to sue me? Would they really go to court over it?

What does the non-compete preclude you from doing? Working directly within the same exact industry, or working within the same generic class of industry / profession?

The former is tougher to work around. The latter has less force - and as a result less likely to be seen in non-compete clauses these days (as NJBuck pointed out bad non-compete clauses could result in an employer paying for a "ghost" position).

I have some legit leverage on my boss.

I made it a point to position myself to get as much leverage on superiors as possible. I could get my boss in a couple felonies.

Seems to me that leverage you keep touting is not germane to the thread subject - Non-Compete Clauses and their legitimacy. What is interesting is that you keep citing the same.

This suggests to me that your position in your present employ is not highest in profile, (plural superiors) which is to your benefit when thinking of taking your skills elsewhere. The lower on the tree you are the more portable your skills.

One other test to apply - what did you get for signing the current clause on accepting your current employment? If you received benefits, options or other above salary benefits - or a linked boost to compensation then you may be putting that at risk retroactively.

If all you really got was the job - then the non-compete is likely viewed as assymetric. Then, perhaps, that nasty issue of the leverage you claim to have over your superiors might come into play, if deftly handled.

Your best next step, regardless, would be to go to a qualified Employment Lawyer.

 

[gbearbuck]

This post is worth exactly what you paid for it.. zero

Non-competes are toughest when there is truly something tangible that could be lost if the non-compete were enforced... if intellectual property or the sort were moved from one firm to a competing firm, it could objectively damage the firm you came from and aid the firm you are going to...

However, they cannot keep you from making a living... they may have to pay you for executing that non-compete.. ie pay you for the two years your non-compete is in effect...

Non-competes are big in the financial advisor world... but for the most part, these cases are better at creating 'space' and stalling than real impact... If the firm can stall you for a length of time to make whatever you have less valuable... they conceptually accomplish what they wanted... ie time to contact your clients and steal them away from you

Everything is for sale... have seen many non-competes dissolve at the negotiation table and money changes hands...

If the company has EVER let one 'violation' go, they're probably toast from ever winning one... they gotta be iron clad over ALWAYS going after 'violators'

Best is always have an attorney look at the contract to see how iron-clad it is...

What NJ said... they will sue... your new firm will pay much lower settlement, and all parties are to keep their mouths shut regarding said settlement...