[NYT] The REAL reason wages are low. No, not globalization and automation - "monopsony".

[VirtualLarry]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/28/opinion/corporate-america-suppressing-wages.html

This really opened my eyes. I was subject to a non-compete agreement, as my first employment as a software developer, but it blew my mind that non-skilled fast-food employees are also asked to sign non-competes. WTF???

I'm glad Elizabeth Warren is going to introduce legislation to get rid of that practice.

I'm of the view that non-competes should be blatantly illegal, in ALL cases. (Not just in Cali.)

 

[Ventanni]

Suppressing competition in an economic environment that thrives because of competition is counter intuitive.

 

[K1052]

Suppressing competition in an economic environment that thrives because of competition is counter intuitive.

Depends what your interest is. If you're profiting from the status quo then you hate competition and do everything conceivable to crush it.

 

[Bitek]

Overall they seem anti-capitalist and should be banned.

I won't hold my breath waiting for the Rs to do it.

 

[Phokus]

Overall they seem anti-capitalist and should be banned.

I won't hold my breath waiting for the Rs to do it.

Actually they are completely capitalist. The rightwing theory is that you have a 'choice' as to whether or not to sign a non-compete and competing firms will offer jobs without them. This is, of course, nonsense when the number of workers outnumber the available jobs, employers can dictate the terms of employment, especially when consolidation is going on.

 

[ElFenix]

Actually they are completely capitalist. The rightwing theory is that you have a 'choice' as to whether or not to sign a non-compete and competing firms will offer jobs without them.

And this logic stops applying as soon as you have to pay union dues to work somewhere

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Most noncompete agreements are generally invalid anyway. Or easily invalidated. I was asked to sign one that I wouldn’t work in my industry for two years if I left. This was during my employment, not before. I told them I wouldn’t sign it as I can’t be denied the ability to make a livelihood in an area I’ve specifically been trained and employed in. Even if I had it would be easily voided if they tried to push the issue.

 

[Victorian Gray]

seems appropriate

 

[VirtualLarry]

That comic strip is very appropriate, and succinct.

 

[Fenixgoon]

no poaching and noncompetes are hugely detrimental to actual workers. think about the untold billions silicon valley "saved" by agreeing to no-poach/non-compete agreements.

they settled for a paltry ~400M all said and done. i wouldn't be surprised if the lost wages of all affected workers exceeded 100B when you consider the number of people and years this has all been taking place.

as long as it remains profitable for employers to abuse employees, they will do so.

 

[Greenman]

I always thought those agreements were to discourage employees from stealing proprietary information and taking it to a competitor. I also thought there was substantial amounts of money paid out when one of those employees left.
If your employer is rendering you worthless in the job market, they should have to continue paying you throughout the time you can't work elsewhere.

 

[HumblePie]

no poaching and noncompetes are hugely detrimental to actual workers. think about the untold billions silicon valley "saved" by agreeing to no-poach/non-compete agreements.

they settled for a paltry ~400M all said and done. i wouldn't be surprised if the lost wages of all affected workers exceeded 100B when you consider the number of people and years this has all been taking place.

as long as it remains profitable for employers to abuse employees, they will do so.

Yep. Same reason price fixing and collusion goes on. How many times have the memory makers been slapped with fines for collusion and are STILL doing it to this day? They make more money than the fines cover. It's not like consumers have any choice of what bran they would really like as there are only a few memory makers for electronics and they are ALL in collusion. You can't just boycott them easily either.

 

[HumblePie]

I always thought those agreements were to discourage employees from stealing proprietary information and taking it to a competitor. I also thought there was substantial amounts of money paid out when one of those employees left.
If your employer is rendering you worthless in the job market, they should have to continue paying you throughout the time you can't work elsewhere.

There is NDAs (Non Disclosure Agreements), and there is con-competes. NDA means you can't talk about proprietary info or trade secrets you may have learned from one employer with another if you leave for a competing business. Non-compete mean just that. If you go to work for a business that directly competes with your previous company, then they are going to sue the hell out of you if they can because you "signed" a non-compete. NDAs and non-competes are not the same thing. One is legal and the other is in the "grey" of legality depending upon where you live or completely illegal in some states.

 

[Brainonska511]

There is NDAs (Non Disclosure Agreements), and there is con-competes. NDA means you can't talk about proprietary info or trade secrets you may have learned from one employer with another if you leave for a competing business. Non-compete mean just that. If you go to work for a business that directly competes with your previous company, then they are going to sue the hell out of you if they can because you "signed" a non-compete. NDAs and non-competes are not the same thing. One is legal and the other is in the "grey" of legality depending upon where you live or completely illegal in some states.

The only way non-compete agreement should be legal is 1) you are in a capacity to bring clients/insider-knowledge with you to a new job in the same industry AND 2) they will pay you for the period of time the non-compete agreement covers.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Non compete clauses are close to impossible to enforce in MA.
We do have amongst the highest wages too so maybe there is something to this.

 

[Moonbeam]

The reason that a law that restricts non-competitive agreements is a good thing is because it reduces the competitiveness of those who would employ it to increase their own competitiveness over other businesses they compete with. The bottom line is that competition creates the fear and hate of losing, contempt for others.

We are animals born with a survival instinct, selfish intrinsically, but who adapted to competition with other species via cooperation. It is this genetic fact of our natures that produces the fundamental law of civilizations everywhere, don't do unto others what you would hate done to you.

Our economic system is based not on what is best among us but what is our worst instincts and that is why our economic success stories are generally psychopaths. It is why we live in fear and hate of others and why so many are forced to compromise what is best within them to survive.

These problems will never be fixed because our system depends on desperation to equate to willingness to work for nothing. It doesn't matter that we destroy ourselves tomorrow if there is profit in a move today.

 

[mect]

I'd say this is another reason for low wages, not the real reason.