I`m a lawyer in California. Laws on this kind of thing vary from state to state, so you really need to consult a lawyer in your state. I`m going to explain the law in California. Non-competition bans are difficult to enforce, at least in California. They are enforceable during employment and in connection with the sale of a business, but this is the case. You can quit your job at any time and open your own contest. During your employment, you owe it to your employer to be loyal. This means that you cannot discuss with your employer`s customers the exit and creation of your new business. You can prepare for competition while you are still working for your current employer (i.e. sign a new lease, get a header and business cards, etc.), but you can`t recruit customers while you`re still working on it. You can`t take anything with you like a Rolodex.
I hope it helps. Contact a local lawyer for more information. Similarly, Mr. Palatnik`s assertion that Nicole Lomba advised her superiors to demote her performance reviews from January 2003 to August 2003 does not amount to the level of a negative employment measure. Beforehand, the Tribunal finds that Palatnik has provided no informed evidence that these conclusions have in fact been reduced. Contrary to Palatnik`s unfounded accusations, Lomba`s sworn certification suggests that it never advised Hatton or Lydamore to degrade Palatnik`s results in the January and August 2003 evaluations. (Lomba Cert. Similarly, Lydamore`s sworn certification confirms that Lomba never ordered him to reduce Palatnik`s score during the audit in August 2003.
(Lydamore Cert. Instead, Lydamore explains that Lomba simply offered to correct spelling and grammar errors and add a more detailed game plan for Palatnik`s performance issues. (Lyndmore Cert. In other words, Lydamore`s sworn confirmation of what Lomba told him is in direct contradiction to Palatnik`s hearsay accusations in its certification. (See Pl. Cert. In any event, even if Lomba had ordered the supervisory authorities to reduce Palatnik`s assessments, there is no evidence that its duties, opportunities, privileges or compensations have changed as a result of these evaluation results or that it has threatened to dismiss or have it resign. See Weston, 251 F.3d to 431; Robinson, 120 F.3d to 1300; Mancini, 794 A.2d to 207. At best, these allegations create a bad working relationship between Lomba and Palatnik, but this is not enough to justify an unfavourable employment measure. See Buffa, 56 Fed. I`m appx.
576. Depending on your condition. Some states consider them valid, others do not, and some in reason (z.B. at a certain distance). What the non-competition clause says also depends on EXACTLY. Often, a non-competition clause is to prevent someone who works in a place from leaving customers and withdrawing them. So you really need to read this non-competition clause and understand exactly how it will affect your future job if you sign it and give it up. If it is understood why a company wishes to use a non-compete agreement (or a non-compete clause in its employment contract) to protect its trade secrets, the agreement must be appropriate.