Eliminate non-competes all together

Non-competes are an insult to our Massachusetts culture of freedom, innovation, and enterprise. These non-competes are a form of bondage that extend an unfair burden on ‘the little guy’ for long after the employer has stopped paying them or providing benefits. Getting rid of this is long overdue. (I almost hate to throw this rhetoric …

Thank you for the support for change!

Thanks for the great response — a number of very thoughtful posts in this forum. I have read them all (as of 2/10). Additionally, I received several dozen personal email responses on the issue, to which I have also responded. Many good stories, many useful arguments, some helpful specific suggestions. At a high level, I …

Re: Non-competition agreement in another profession

Dear Will, I am 100% in favor of getting rid of non-competition agreements. They even exist in other professions than the tech industry. I remember that a friend had to sign a non-competion agreement when she went to work at a beauty salon. She could not work for another salon or open a salon within …

Non-competes of "very limited utility" in China, unenforceable in India

While China and India are often accused of having lax labor standards, non-competes are one area where their laws are stronger than in Massachusetts. Perhaps we should consider their laws as a model for Massachusetts: Re China, from http://www.chinalawblog.com/2010/01/employee_noncompete_agreements.html “Employers simply need to face the fact that non-competition agreements have very limited utility under Chinese …

employers have other ways to protect themselves that make more sense

will, thanks for sponsoring such an important piece of legislation. i’ve signed over a dozen non-competes in software and life science industries on both coasts. too often they lead to ill-will and excessively long legal discussions leading to acceptance of a intentionally vague document, because its “standard” and/or “un-enforceable” i’ve come to understand, however, that …

Balancing company rights vs. employee’s rights

If the purpose of non-competition agreements is to preserve companies’ ownership of specific technologies or intellectual property developed by and legaly ownable by them, then non-competetion should be STRICTLY limited just to those items, and not allowed to effect a blanket and open-ended suffocation of further innovation by the employee (once he/she leaves the company). …