Should my son sign a non-compete clause?

My mother was faced with this same exact problem as your son. My mother was "let go" after the company she worked for decided to sell off its division she worked in to their competitor. When she got the job 5 years prior she had to sign a non compete agreement which stated after she was fired or quit, she could not work with a direct competitor for two years, but I think the company even went as far to say as within the industry.

My mom is well known throughout her industry and didn't want to leave that industry. In fact after she was let go she had so many job offers from the competing companies it was unbelievable. My mom told these people about her non compete and they ALL paid her to go see a lawyer because they all wanted her so bad. So she went to different lawyers in town to get different opinions since it was free for her.

Long story short all the lawyers said non competes are tricky, and are difficult to enforce in court (at least PA courts). Besides, how many employers are actually going to enforce them? It costs money to go to court and it probably wont' be worth their time. Several of the lawyers stated this as well: even though you signed a non compete, your previous employer cannot deny you the right to earn a living. So for example if your a chemical engineer and company A makes you sign a non compete, they can't stop you from working at company B being a chemical engineer because that would deny you the right to earn a living.

If you don't do anything to INTENTIONALLY hurt your previous employer you signed the non compete agreement with, then they probably won't take you to court over it. Like the attorneys all said, they are difficult to enforce and nobody can deny you the right to earn a living.

If I were your son and it meant getting job, I'd sign it. Jobs are tough to get now, especially if your fresh out of college. The employer probably won't go after him if he works for a competitor later. It's not like he worked there for 20 years and is leaving to go work for a competitor to intentionally hurt the company he is leaving. He's fresh out of college and not too familiar with the industry yet anyway.

Consult an attorney(if you feel the need) but............

In some states the clause is just illegal and unenforceable.

In many others it is enforceable but only if the employee is working with bona fide proprietary information (which can in some instances include client list) or "trade secrets". Very few jobs meet these criteria.

In all states that allow the clause it must be strictly construed, must include time limits and reasonable geographic limits.

Assuming the clause is legal and enforceable there is the question of consequences of failing to follow the agreement. What does your son receive in return and what are the penalties for a breach. Unless your son has received something of value they cannot recoup a judgment for failing to follow the agreement. Your sons final paycheck could not be held or any deductions made due to this agreement. The only way the employer can recoup any loss is through the legal system and that is not likely for a low wage position.

If your son receives a large sign-on bonus then the employer can seek to recoup that but they cannot touch earned wages.

Generally these are used to "scare" the employee, to help ensure the training time invested shows a return for the employer. Recruitment, hiring and training are expensive and some employers mistakenly think they can make unhappy employees somehow stay and perform better with unreasonable threats and conditions. The fact is recruiters seldom last very long. Their need hinges on employee turnover and job market and generally is not a high reward profession as you have noted.

Consult an attorney in your jurisdiction but you will find that he CAN sign and it really won't make any difference.

If he decides to leave early there won't be any legal recourse because these clauses are generally unenforceable (the employer knows this as well).

The non-compete is a very common document, and he should probably sign it.

Read it carefully, but for the most part it usually means he will not work for a direct competitor of the company he's at. He can still be a recruiter, but if he's recruiting for IBM they might have a problem with him jumping ship and recruiting for HP, because he'll have a lot of their company policy information, etc.

Even then, he could still work for a competitor usually, as long as he follows certain guidelines.

If you're really worried about it give it a careful look or have a legal advisor take a look at it.

Honestly, though, it's a pretty standard doc. It's up there with Non-disclosure agreements..

Non-competes are sticky. I would suggest having a lawyer look at the agreement and give some advice on it.

The agreement can be negotiated but the reason why they want a non-compete is to prevent him from getting on the job training, and then going off to a competitor for better pay later.

There are ways to limit the non-compete and it may be limited in terms of time and territory. Again it depends on the wording of the agreement and what the lawyer says.

However, asking for advice on Yahoo Answers! is pretty much useless without some professional advice.

It is standard practice. And, it is taken seriously. If he leaves and tries to work for a competitor the competitor will not hire, as they know the legal implications of the non-compete...it works both ways. Any good company will have the same policy. (retired IBM exec mgr)