Non-competes are very important legal instruments to protect company IP. Although I know you don't understand the importance of IP or think it important, so that's probably part of the issue here.
P.S. Telling me that Commiefornia does something isn't a good way to convince me it's a good idea.
Which is why California be like "get bent."But I guess someone who wants to bar those employees from working is going to come up with rationales why it is reasonable.
What if I told you that can be read from both sides of this?No behavior is easier to justify than that which is in one's own best interests.
What of value did you receive in exchange for signing this contract? Sounds like nothing other than pay. If so, that sounds like indentured servitude.The Company I work for is based in Massachusetts, I'm currently based in Illinois. I've been with the company for under a year and have not received any type ratings or new certificates through the company. The opportunity would provide pay me twice as much as I do now, and would offer my young and growing family stability instead of the possibility of moving every 6 months. And my time on my contract doesn't start until I make Captain, and then the duration is 18 months. I've signed the contract already, or else I would not be employed at this company, but the time frame has not even begun.
True. I've seen both sides of the issue. Problem is, in most cases, the employer has the power to impose conditions. The applicant is just looking for a job.What if I told you that can be read from both sides of this?
In the case of OP's poorly disguised employer, it's because they can sell that seat, and the loss of revenue is what they're guarding against.This has nothing to do with PFT agreements.
No behavior is easier to justify than that which is in one's own best interests.
The only rational behavior is that which is in one’s own best interest.
LOL! My first thought too. But the problem is various definitions of "one's own best interest."Okay, Ayn.
So far I've only received hours and pay (if you can call it that)What of value did you receive in exchange for signing this contract? Sounds like nothing other than pay. If so, that sounds like indentured servitude.
Your barely disguised employer had to block your seat (a loss of revenue, as they can sell it) for you to do that. And once you’re done with that they expect you to upgrade and provide honest to goodness useful labor. Which is why that contract exists. Or so the rationale goes.So far I've only received hours and pay (if you can call it that)
If they sue and they win, it's just like any other court judgment and garnishment follows the rules in he state where the employer is located.Can wages be garnished at your new employer if they rule you broke a contract?
And guess how much an employer likes a sheriff’s deputy walking into their office to serve a garnishment order? Not a good way to make your new employer like you while you’re on probation.
MidlifeFlyer is on point here. I was in some litigation about five years ago and the first thing the defence counsel did was demand all of my social media account information. Coincidentally I had scrubbed and deleted my "MySpace" and "Facebook" accounts about several months before we filed suit.BTW, one piece of real advice. Dunno if you are using your real name but it's a bad idea to discuss stuff like this in detail on social media.
“Women won’t • me and it’s because taxes!”Okay, Ayn.