There is a fundamental difference in interests between employers and employees. Employers, represented by corporate officers, executives and managers, look to increase profits or territorial impact while balancing budgets and building in healthy financial margins.
Employees, on the other hand, may be invested in the overall mission of their employers, but they also need to earn a paycheck. There is perhaps no greater example of the friction that can exist between employers and employees than non-compete agreements.
From an employer’s perspective, non-compete agreements protect the interests of the company or organization. These agreements limit employees’ ability to take their knowledge and skills – perhaps learned through employment with the employer – to nearby competitors. Employees, however, may simply view non-compete agreements as a non-negotiable requirement to get the job they need, which then impedes their ability to work wherever they want in the future.
Litigation continues
Non-compete agreements have always been subject to legal challenges. But, as a recent news article noted, these days the court challenges are having a nationwide impact.
For example, the Federal Trade Commission previously proposed a rule that would outright ban employers – in most cases – from requiring employees to sign non-compete agreements. That rule was challenged in several federal courts and, recently, it was put on hold. There are questions about whether or not the rule will ever go into effect. States, however, are taking their own steps to pass legislation regarding non-compete agreements.
If you are being asked to sign a non-compete agreement, be sure to get the right information about your legal options. Employees in Colorado have legal protections to consider in any engagement with employers about the terms of their employment.