Question About Non-Compete Clauses in Food-Service-Industry Contracts

[pjm333]

Been looking for a new job recently and I coming across Employment Contacts which is new for me. I was ready to take the position but on a section of the contract it says this,

 

( 1) during the Employment Period and for a term of 12 months following termination of your employment with the Company work for or engage in a bakery focused business that is located or intended to be located anywhere in (the surrounding counties) is prohibited. 

 

Maybe I am reading it wrong but what I think they are saying is that I cannot work for 1 year in a bakery business after leaving the company. Has anyone ever dealt with something like this and is this enforceable ? 

[rotuts]

he from does not want previous employees to compete with them

 

' derby '   where nearby is surrounding counties.

 

in the USA recently

 

non-compete class are under ' duress '

[blue_dolphin]

Yes, it's called a non-compete clause.

As @rotuts mentioned, they have been in the news lately in the US: The FTC banned noncompetes

[Tropicalsenior]

I think it was set up primarily aimed at business owners that sold their business. They weren't allowed to set up a competing business within a certain time limit or within a certain area of their previous business. Now, businesses are using it so that former employees do not carry business secrets and proprietary recipes to competitors.

[gfweb]

Non-compete clauses have been invalidated by FTC.

 

But it doesn't start for 6 months and is sure to be challenged.

 

It can't be counted-on yet.

[AlaMoi]

non-compete employment clauses have been around for much longer than "current events" -

companies banning employment in any similar industry . . . anywhere in the world . . . for X years.

all have found to be legally indefensible.  fwiw.

 

in the "feed people" industry - who owns the recipes and who is allowed to use the recipes here-there-thither . . .

is a frequent issue defined by sales contract (in the case of owner selling to .....)

 

"famous" recipes and liquor licenses . . . always a fun discussion . . .

[gfweb]

1 hour ago, AlaMoi said:

all have found to be legally indefensible.  fwiw.

 

 

 

Clearly you know more than lawyers and the FTC  (snicker).

 

FWIW "all" encompasses a lot of ground.

[cdh]

What state are you in?  California all but outlaws noncompetes... Some states love them and enforce them vigorously.  Where you are will determine what that clause means... but it tells you what your new bosses would _like_ to be the case.  If I wanted the job but not the restriction I'd cross out that line, initial and date by it, sign the paper and send it back.  If you're still hired, the problem is solved. 

[rotuts]

you would of course keep a copy.

[KennethT]

Not only that but even if it was "legally indefensible", it would requiring hiring a lawyer to dispute it which can be costly, to say the least.

[liuzhou]

5 hours ago, AlaMoi said:

companies banning employment in any similar industry . . . anywhere in the world . . . for X years.

all have found to be legally indefensible.

 

This is totally incorrect. In 2019, in the UK (somewhere in the world), the UK Supreme Court upheld non-compete clauses. Similar rulings have been made in many places.

 

 

[Duvel]

I found this current article on the matter informative …

 

Quote:

 

Researchers estimate that one in six U.S. food preparation and service workers have signed a noncompete agreement as have one in five workers in the agriculture or hunting industry, based on a survey of nearly 67,000 workers. This means as many as 1.4 million food workers are potentially bound by a noncompete agreement, affecting low- and high-wage food workers alike. They’re particularly pernicious across fast food chains, but they also impact chefs, white-collar food service managers, food safety specialists, and many more.

Edited April 28 by Duvel (log)

[JeanneCake]

I'd probably consider how often the turnover is at the place you're considering (are they always hiring, do you see them appear in the usual job posting sites All. The. Time.?); how  many other bakeries or bakery-focused places are in a radius that you're willing to travel to if you should decide to leave that place.  As a bakery owner, I am always aware that staff could take our recipes and use them somewhere else - and I specifically address that with  new hires (there are three or four recipes that I consider proprietary and part of our core products that I don't want to see pop up somewhere else).  People are either ethical (won't steal a recipe or will ask if they can have it before purloining it ) or they aren't and frankly, there isn't much you can do about that anymore.  Cell phones are prevalent and a quick screen shot of a recipe can happen without you knowing. 

[AlaMoi]

11 hours ago, liuzhou said:

 

This is totally incorrect. In 2019, in the UK (somewhere in the world), the UK Supreme Court upheld non-compete clauses. Similar rulings have been made in many places.

 

 

it may be incorrect in UK, but it is not incorrect for USA

[liuzhou]

6 minutes ago, AlaMoi said:

it may be incorrect in UK, but it is not incorrect for USA

 

You said ""anywhere in the world".

 

It isn't true for all the USA either, as others have pointed out.

[AlaMoi]

"anywhere in the world" refers to the employee taking a competing job in another country.

 

[Shelby]

When we sold our lumber business Ronnie had to sign a 5 year no compete to work for/at/with anyone in the lumber industry anywhere.  

[liuzhou]

7 hours ago, AlaMoi said:

"anywhere in the world" refers to the employee taking a competing job in another country.

 

 

 

Well, if that was what you meant, and it wasn't clear, it would be unenforceable anyway.

Edited April 28 by liuzhou (log)

[pjm333]

Thanks everyone for your help, I am not taking the job. The agreement was 4 pages long 23 sections etc silly I think. 

[TicTac]

Honestly, non-competes are bullshit.

 

A company cannot prevent you from making a living.  Plain and simple.  Also keep in mind, it would cost them a lot of money to come after you - to what end? 

 

Here in Ontario (Canada) within the last year or two the gov has put an end to them as these clauses are immoral and unjust. 

 

Unless you are in a high profile job with access to industry 'secrets' I would not worry too much about it and just go for it.

 

[TdeV]

4 hours ago, TicTac said:

Unless you are in a high profile job with access to industry 'secrets' I would not worry too much about it and just go for it.

 

Implies quite a lot of "good failth" in other persons' behaviour. Where legal documents are concerned, it seems a bit foolhardy.

[gfweb]

4 hours ago, TicTac said:

 

Unless you are in a high profile job with access to industry 'secrets' I would not worry too much about it and just go for it.

 

 

That's not how non-competes work in the real world.  Trade secrets are rarely at issue.  You can fight a non-compete, and maybe even win, but it comes at a cost.