zlacker

[return to "New York may ban noncompete employment agreements and Wall Street is not happy"]
1. ajb+d7[view] [source] 2023-11-18 09:21:34
>>pg_123+(OP)
After noncompetes, they should go after non-solicitation. Entire teams that work well together should be able to defect from shitty employers. It kind of happens anyway but on the quiet, inefficiently - I'd love to see a job website where you can list an entire team.
◧◩
2. cj+di[view] [source] 2023-11-18 10:56:45
>>ajb+d7
Non-solicits also include not soliciting customers.

Which is particularly relevant at consultancies where the product is a service.

If you join a consultancy group, and 2 months later quit with the client roster... is it really OK to poach all their clients to start your own consultancy?

All of these contracts are time limited, FWIW. E.g. non-solicitation doesn't mean you can never work your your colleagues again. It protects against someone leaving and then immediately poaching all employees within 12 months. After 12 months you're welcome to poach as much as you'd like.

Edit: Furthermore, non-solicits don't ban your colleagues from quitting with you, as long as you're not directly asking them to quit. If they make the decision independently without being lobbied by a former employee, it's not in violation of non-solicit.

◧◩◪
3. izacus+sj[view] [source] 2023-11-18 11:07:42
>>cj+di
> If you join a consultancy group, and 2 months later quit with the client roster... is it really OK to poach all their clients to start your own consultancy?

Yes. It's called free market competition and it's great for the society and economy. NYC bankers should be first in line to understand that.

◧◩◪◨
4. cj+0q[view] [source] 2023-11-18 11:55:59
>>izacus+sj
What you’re advocating for is normalizing the stealing of company IP.

The way you solicit clients from a prior company is downloading the client list, exporting to a personal drive, quitting, then using the list to poach.

I’m fine if that’s your intention, but let your employer know upfront that you won’t protect confidential company data.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. izacus+Gs[view] [source] 2023-11-18 12:15:45
>>cj+0q
> What you’re advocating for is normalizing the stealing of company IP.

I am not.

> The way you solicit clients from a prior company is downloading the client list, exporting to a personal drive, quitting, then using the list to poach.

Which part of this is "IP"?

The whole concept of "stealing IP" is something that was lobbied in to prevent market competition and establish monopolies. Calling a list of clients that might choose to vote with their wallets for better service "IP" is one of the most ridiculous claims I've seen here lately and pretty much proof of how this term has become a problem for modern free market society.

While IP protection itself is critical for some innovation, the way you all wield it to defend monopolization and entrenchment is a main reason to rethink what IP and protection actually gives to american economy.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. cj+yA[view] [source] 2023-11-18 13:10:35
>>izacus+Gs
> Which part of this is "IP"?

I should have said conditional customer data. (Client lists, phone numbers, email addresses - basically whatever you can export out of Salesforce)

In order to poach your old company’s customers, you’ll need confidential data from your prior employer, assuming that your employer doesn’t publish their client roster publicly.

The debate is being dragged from poaching customers to how IP protections enable monopolies. That’s too big of a leap to be relevant in this thread (sorry for saying IP rather than confidential data)

[go to top]