שטוטאקוי, אתר מאמרים אישי

What are the reasons why the courts consider a non-competition agreement to be appropriate? In a New York lawsuit against sandwich chain Jimmy Johns, the court ruled that the company`s non-compete bans, which prevented employees from working in a similar sector, which mainly worked with sandwiches for two years, were void. In response to this case, legislation prohibiting the use of a non-compete clause for workers earning less than $15 per hour (US$31,200 per year) or the minimum wage in force in the worker`s commune is currently being proposed. Check again and again to determine the status of this legislation. The Minnesota courts will check the facts of each case to determine whether a non-compete clause is valid and applicable. First, a court decides whether the employer has awarded the worker an appropriate consideration for the non-competition clause. In return, this means that the employee received something in exchange for signing the non-competition clause. When the non-compete agreement is concluded at the beginning of the employment relationship, the promise of employment is considered appropriate for the agreement to be valid. If the non-competition agreement is entered into after the start of the employment relationship, it is only valid if the employer provided additional consideration that would be additional money or other benefit to which the worker was not otherwise entitled. What will happen to a non-compete clause if an employee`s position changes due to a promotion or transfer? In some cases, in Massachusetts, it was found that a new non-compete clause had to be signed each time a worker`s relationship with an employer changed significantly. Whether a job promotion or transfer is a significant change is a question of degree. This is why we recommend that employers review non-compete agreements (and other restrictive agreements) for any worker who has a change of position.

An employer may require the employee to sign a new non-competition function or to sign a document confirming the change of position and that the worker`s competitiveness remains effective. A less restrictive (but perhaps less effective) response to this question is to include in all restrictive agreements that indicate to the worker that the federal government remains in force and independently of changes in employment conditions, including changes in obligations, position or compensation.