Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

jeff47

(26,549 posts)

9. Actually, virtually all of them are not enforceable.

Reply to Gothmog (Reply #7)

Tue Mar 31, 2015, 12:17 PM

Mar 2015

Employers routinely require them to be signed. They also can't enforce them unless they are extremely specific about what they forbid - like naming specific competitors and specific secrets.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

10 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Amazon Requires Badly-Paid Warehouse Temps to Sign 18-Month Non-Competes [View all] marmar Mar 2015 OP

Disgusting. TDale313 Mar 2015 #1

Fear tactic. AFAIK, No competes are hard to enforce and Amazon isn't likely to spend money Thor_MN Mar 2015 #2

Amazon Gets Rid Of Strict Non-Compete Clause For Contract And Temporary Employees krawhitham Mar 2015 #3

Only because they saw the potential backlash. ohnoyoudidnt Mar 2015 #4

Yeah, Damn them for changing to what we wanted!!! jeff47 Mar 2015 #8

I don't think that should be legal. daredtowork Mar 2015 #5

K&R. Amazon is one of the biggest anti-labor operations going. But when I posted a ND-Dem Mar 2015 #6

There are issues with these non-competes Gothmog Mar 2015 #7

Actually, virtually all of them are not enforceable. jeff47 Mar 2015 #9

Test snooper2 Mar 2015 #10