shenanigan
New Member
I was recently laid off from my job. Upon leaving, I asked to be released from my non-compete agreement, and I was told NO. So much for that.
But now that I'm reading it, I see it was worded VERY badly. It looks like a rough draft. About a third of it covers confidentiality (which I also had to sign a separate agreement for), and most of the rest of it covers what they'll do if the signer breaks it. However, the one paragraph that covers what you can't do is the paragraph I think is worded badly. This is the paragraph in question, written exactly as it is in the agreement (minus the company name):
"2. Employee agrees that for a total period of one (1) year following termination. This Agreement ("Restrictive Period"), will not, anywhere in the Market, directly or indirectly, own, manage, operate, control, invest or acquire an interest in, provide or guaranty a loan for, or otherwise engage or participate in, whether as a proprieter, partner, stockholder, lender, director, officer, employee, joint venturer, investor, lessor, supplier, customer, or other participant, any business which competes, directly or indirectly, with the Business, within the Market, unless employee first obtains prior written consent from [company name] and signed by a Corporate Officer."
If you pick that apart, the first sentence is not only incomplete, but doesn't actually say what the employee agrees to. And the second sentence says, after pulling out all the bullhonky, "This Agreement will not associate with in any way with any business which competes with [company name]." It does NOT say The EMPLOYEE will not compete. So technically I didn't agree to not work for the competition, I agreed that the piece of paper I signed wouldn't work for the competition LOL Am I completely off base with this?
Also, I think that the restriction might be too large. Paragraph 1 says that the "Market" is a 100 mile radius of the business. Being in the Detroit area, that would mean I can't work from Findlay, OH to Bay City, from Battle Creek to somewhere in Ontario. Will the courts enforce such a HUGE restriction?
If anyone wants to read this agreement in full, let me know. Any insight into whether this will hold up would be greatly appreciated!
But now that I'm reading it, I see it was worded VERY badly. It looks like a rough draft. About a third of it covers confidentiality (which I also had to sign a separate agreement for), and most of the rest of it covers what they'll do if the signer breaks it. However, the one paragraph that covers what you can't do is the paragraph I think is worded badly. This is the paragraph in question, written exactly as it is in the agreement (minus the company name):
"2. Employee agrees that for a total period of one (1) year following termination. This Agreement ("Restrictive Period"), will not, anywhere in the Market, directly or indirectly, own, manage, operate, control, invest or acquire an interest in, provide or guaranty a loan for, or otherwise engage or participate in, whether as a proprieter, partner, stockholder, lender, director, officer, employee, joint venturer, investor, lessor, supplier, customer, or other participant, any business which competes, directly or indirectly, with the Business, within the Market, unless employee first obtains prior written consent from [company name] and signed by a Corporate Officer."
If you pick that apart, the first sentence is not only incomplete, but doesn't actually say what the employee agrees to. And the second sentence says, after pulling out all the bullhonky, "This Agreement will not associate with in any way with any business which competes with [company name]." It does NOT say The EMPLOYEE will not compete. So technically I didn't agree to not work for the competition, I agreed that the piece of paper I signed wouldn't work for the competition LOL Am I completely off base with this?
Also, I think that the restriction might be too large. Paragraph 1 says that the "Market" is a 100 mile radius of the business. Being in the Detroit area, that would mean I can't work from Findlay, OH to Bay City, from Battle Creek to somewhere in Ontario. Will the courts enforce such a HUGE restriction?
If anyone wants to read this agreement in full, let me know. Any insight into whether this will hold up would be greatly appreciated!
