I have an offer from a media company in Seattle,WA. In their offer they have a non Compete clause which restricts me from working for a competitor for 1 year after leaving. I was ok with it but they also mentioned Amazon in the list of competitors. I believe it is because of Amazon Videos, but that is a small part of Amazon and they should not stop me from any other part of Amazon. Is it ok to negotiate on this? Please share your experience.
Non compete clauses are void in California (thank god). When I first came across the clause, I tried to negotiate to have it taken out - but then I was informed that it was company policy for all employees. I’ve spoken to a lawyer about this in the past, and their advice was to just use logic - 99% of the time you won’t be taking information away that will be so valuable that a company will invest in legal action to stop you. If you are working on algorithms, trade secrets etc (ie market-changing stuff they will bother to go after you on), you may want to reconsider. There’s no shame in asking if that part of the agreement is negotiable. It is possible the company will pay for your time when you are unable to work (if there is a broad definition of competitors), if you are let go involuntarily Ps if this is a strong concern for you, I highly recommend giving the agreement to a (WA) lawyer to review. I got mine reviewed for $500 in NoCal (and I’m pretty sure it won’t be so much in WA)
Washington state really needs to get rid of these. There is someone in the leg attempting it.
I think it’s fair to negotiate 1 year pay without work if you been let go by them.
if you’re not a VP or above ignore it
Wat company ?