Motorola suing Rim

[jjzelinski]

Personally, I find this absolutely disgusting. I hope, somehow, people eventually get so fed up with this kind of bullshit that they're willing to force our government to take action against it. Corporate America PR is already in the gutter so hopefully this adds fuel to the fire.

 

[Robor]

Are non-compete agreements valid if you're fired or laid off?

 

[Bateluer]

The non-compete agreement rubs me the wrong way. If Person A works for Company A, does an excellent job and has plenty of experience, but feels under appreciated, under utilized, or just plain isn't happy, and they get an offer from competing Company B for increased pay/benefits, they should have every right to take it the position. This is competition, a fundamental value of the free market. If Company A wants to keep Person A, then they need to address why Person A wants to take the job at Company B, not bind them into restricting legal mumbo jumbo.

 

[waggy]

i fully agree wiht non-compete aggeements. BUT in the case of fireing or getting laid off they should be void.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Once you are no longer drawing a check from the company, you are no longer an employee.

Motorola has no standing if the wording of agreements and suits are using the wording specified in the article.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: waggy
i fully agree wiht non-compete aggeements. BUT in the case of fireing or getting laid off they should be void.

I had to stop and think about this for a moment... I was going to say, that if an employee gets laid off or fired, they are more likely to bring ex-employer's ideas to the competing company. But then I realized, if they're fired, that means they have no choice but to work for a similar company if that is what their specialty is in. So yea, screw the ex-employer, let them compete.

 

[ScottyB]

Non-competes should be illegal. They basically make a person a paid slave to one company.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: Bateluer
The non-compete agreement rubs me the wrong way. If Person A works for Company A, does an excellent job and has plenty of experience, but feels under appreciated, under utilized, or just plain isn't happy, and they get an offer from competing Company B for increased pay/benefits, they should have every right to take it the position. This is competition, a fundamental value of the free market. If Company A wants to keep Person A, then they need to address why Person A wants to take the job at Company B, not bind them into restricting legal mumbo jumbo.

The free market and the constitution allow companies to profit off their ideas. They should be allowed to ensure that disgruntled employees do not take those ideas to the competition.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: waggy
i fully agree wiht non-compete aggeements. BUT in the case of fireing or getting laid off they should be void.

And what if a company just cuts the employe's pay to minimum wage so as to persuade him to quit instead?

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: Robor
Are non-compete agreements valid if you're fired or laid off?

That's a good question, any lawyers onboard?

 

[Harvey]

I support non-competition agreements to the extent that an employee who is laid off should still be bound by an agreement not to disclose a former employer's intellectual property to new employer.

This agreement was not with the employees. It wasa between Motorola and RIM. I can't judge the merits of either party's claim based on the info in the article. That's what courts are for.

 

[yllus]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: waggy
i fully agree wiht non-compete aggeements. BUT in the case of fireing or getting laid off they should be void.

And what if a company just cuts the employe's pay to minimum wage so as to persuade him to quit instead?

This should almost never happen, as I doubt there's a court system in North America that wouldn't side with the employee in viewing this as being fired in all but name. There is plenty of precedent for the employee winning such cases up here in Canada.

 

[alchemize]

There should be a law! How dare companies write contracts and try to enforce them!

OP = moron.

Non-compete agreements are BS, I won't sign one without a corresponding renweable employment agreement. Usually they are quite (legally) unenforceable too as most companies are stupid and have you sign them after coming on board which presents a duress situation.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
And what if a company just cuts the employe's pay to minimum wage so as to persuade him to quit instead?

This should almost never happen, as I doubt there's a court system in North America that wouldn't side with the employee in viewing this as being fired in all but name. There is plenty of precedent for the employee winning such cases up here in Canada.

And what if they didn't drop his pay, but did refuse to increase it despite his work leading to landslide profits?

 

[yllus]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
And what if a company just cuts the employe's pay to minimum wage so as to persuade him to quit instead?

This should almost never happen, as I doubt there's a court system in North America that wouldn't side with the employee in viewing this as being fired in all but name. There is plenty of precedent for the employee winning such cases up here in Canada.

And what if they didn't drop his pay, but did refuse to increase it despite his work leading to landslide profits?

And what if the HR manager is a unicorn who hypnotizes the employee into working for three eggs a day? You're missing the point. The legal system has cases of constructive dismissal down pat. Most judges will up the damages paid to the employee to serve as an example of other companies to not go down that road.

Howard Levitt, counsel to Lang Michener LLP, is an employment lawyer and author:

The lessons are clear:

-- Where an employer forces employees to quit, they can sue just as if they were fired;

-- Where an employer mistreats employees by hounding and bullying them, even short service employees not otherwise entitled to much severance can be awarded damages;

-- Where an employer engages in immoral conduct, the damages will be especially high.

 

[RabidMongoose]

There's not much information in the article, but it seems like it may be a trade secret issue. It could be reasonable to bar RIM from hiring employees with such knowledge for some time.

 

[extra]

Originally posted by: Harvey
I support non-competition agreements to the extent that an employee who is laid off should still be bound an agreement not to disclose a former employer's intelletual property to new employer.

Yep, that is dead on with what I think. Common sense, really.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: extra

Originally posted by: Harvey
I support non-competition agreements to the extent that an employee who is laid off should still be bound an agreement not to disclose a former employer's intelletual property to new employer.

Yep, that is dead on with what I think. Common sense, really.

The problem is that sometimes it's difficult to apply such actions, which is usually what most NDAs are used to address. It's easy to say 'you can't disclose confidential information!', but it's hard to mentally compartmentalize confidential information and prevent yourself from even using confidential information to your own advantage in a new job.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
And what if a company just cuts the employe's pay to minimum wage so as to persuade him to quit instead?

This should almost never happen, as I doubt there's a court system in North America that wouldn't side with the employee in viewing this as being fired in all but name. There is plenty of precedent for the employee winning such cases up here in Canada.

And what if they didn't drop his pay, but did refuse to increase it despite his work leading to landslide profits?

And what if the HR manager is a unicorn who hypnotizes the employee into working for three eggs a day? You're missing the point. The legal system has cases of constructive dismissal down pat. Most judges will up the damages paid to the employee to serve as an example of other companies to not go down that road.

Howard Levitt, counsel to Lang Michener LLP, is an employment lawyer and author:

The lessons are clear:

-- Where an employer forces employees to quit, they can sue just as if they were fired;

-- Where an employer mistreats employees by hounding and bullying them, even short service employees not otherwise entitled to much severance can be awarded damages;

-- Where an employer engages in immoral conduct, the damages will be especially high.

None of those points cover my example of simply not increasing pay in acknowledgement of ones part in increasing profits.

 

[DrPizza]

Originally posted by: waggy
i fully agree wiht non-compete aggeements. BUT in the case of fireing or getting laid off they should be void.

I disagree with the firing part. Suppose someone's making 80k from company A, and company B offers them 160k. But, they realize they're locked in a non-compete agreement. It wouldn't be that hard to get fired if you really wanted to get fired.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: alchemize
There should be a law! How dare companies write contracts and try to enforce them!

OP = moron.

Non-compete agreements are BS, I won't sign one without a corresponding renweable employment agreement. Usually they are quite (legally) unenforceable too as most companies are stupid and have you sign them after coming on board which presents a duress situation.

Our company has them and has been able to enforce them when they can provide appropriate paperwork. I have not signed one as I wasn't hired into a position that requires them but have advanced to that point. I'm sure it's just an oversight on HR's part that I haven't signed one but if presented with one, I will politely decline. If that means I need to go job selecting(no hunting in my profession right now) then so be it. I've put in 8 years with this company and I personally don't feel we owe each other anything more than the agreed upon compensation at this point. In my field the non-competes aren't really for anything other than to prevent job-jumpers so I don't feel it applies to my situation.

 

[theeedude]

This should be illegal collusion between two competitors.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: senseamp

This should be illegal collusion between two competitors.

Hardly, specifically because they ARE competitors, each agreeing against their own self or selfish interests.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: DrPizza

Originally posted by: waggy
i fully agree wiht non-compete aggeements. BUT in the case of fireing or getting laid off they should be void.

I disagree with the firing part. Suppose someone's making 80k from company A, and company B offers them 160k. But, they realize they're locked in a non-compete agreement. It wouldn't be that hard to get fired if you really wanted to get fired.

thats true. i really didnt think of that.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: yllus
And what if the HR manager is a unicorn who hypnotizes the employee into working for three eggs a day?

I love hypnotic egg laying unicorns. They are the best. :heart: