undefined | Better HN

0 pointszippothrowaway1y ago0 comments

Doesn't this mean the end of 'at-will' for anyone that a company wants to cover with a non-compete? At present a company can have their cake and eat it, giving you one day notice of end of employment but then enforcing a non-compete for x months.

If this survives the Supreme Court, wouldn't a company would have to put in your employment contract that you/they must give x months notice to end employment if they wanted to restrict you? Otherwise you could give one days notice and they wouldn't be able to put you on gardening leave.

0 comments

viraptor1y ago

The gardening leave still works as long as it's beneficial to both parties. The employee gets an effective long, paid holiday and the company gets a non-complete equivalent. Now they have to really ensure that pay is worth more than changing the employer though.

It's less "end of at-will" and more "if you want effective non-competes, it's going to cost you".

zippothrowawayOP1y ago

Or the employee agreement you sign includes a notice period of 6 months from either side.

I think you're right that negotiated gardening leave will happen but I can also see companies baking in the gardening leave at the start of employment (so no longer at will) as being cheaper.

davidgay1y ago

> Or the employee agreement you sign includes a notice period of 6 months from either side.

Those are illegal in at-will states.

2 more replies

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse