Slashdot Mirror
Seagate Says Ex-Employee Can't Work For Competitor
deweller writes "According to a story at MacCentral, Hard drive maker Seagate Technology LLC is seeking a court injunction to prevent a former employee, Pete Goglia, from going to work for Western Digital Corp. any time in the next 2 years, saying Goglia knows too much about Seagate's hard-drive reading and writing technology to work for a competitor."
According to this article, he did sign something.
Uselessful technology (Air-Charged
In the UK such contractual clauses are explicitly null and void: it's called restraint of trade.
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
I know in Indiana they have what is known as "at will employment." While companies can make non-compete clauses, the employer can not make it stick.
My old company sort of worked around this. They had their customers sign "non-compete" clauses. We had a guy quit and apply for a posision at one of our customers. My old firm found out, sued the company, not the individual, and won.
I think they settled though, the company agreed to continue purchasing a support contact for XX years (i.e. to show that they weren't hiring this guy to replace their contract.)
Don't know if CA is "at will" or not *shrug*
I know in California, except for very limited circrumstances, these contracts are indeed unenforceable. Specifically, I refer to:
CAL. BUS. & PROF. 16600 "Except as provided in this chapter, every contract by which anyone is restrained from engaging in a lawful profession, trade, or business of any kind is to that extent void."
From what I read from the article and from what I remember about signing my previous non-compete agreeement with Seagate (if his was worded the same way), they aren't trying to prevent him from working at Western Digital, just the read/write head division of WD. The way I understood the clause and had it explained to me was that you can't go to work for a competitor and work on the same exact thing you were working on at Seagate. So I don't think they would have a problem with it if he went and worked for WD in some other division, say firmware development or testing.
I think WD should hire him and put him somewhere else for the two years, then move him over to read/write if they want. I think it's fairly reasonable that Seagate wouldn't want him working on the same stuff he was doing for them just a few weeks ago. It's almost impossible to expect that at least some confidential information won't be disclosed.
I belive a non-compete clause, such as ones alluded to here, exist in a number of industries. Speaking as a physician and member of the medical community, most of our contracts have non-compete clauses that state, in effect, "Upon leaving The Practice, you will not practice within your specialty in a similar hospital/clinic located within 5 miles of any of The Practice's locations". Of course, in this field it's so as not to "steal" patients (and therefor business) rather than technology.
No man's an island, unless he's had too much to drink and wets the bed.
In the UK such contractual clauses are explicitly null and void: it's called restraint of trade
You are completely and utterly wrong. The circumstances in the UK are similar to most of the rest of the western modern world: appropriately scoped non-compete agreements are allowable and enforceable. What "appropriatley scoped" means all depends upon the circumstances and nature of the work, but for R&D employees working on new technologies, 12 months is not uncommon.
I believe one of the requirements for a valid CA non-compete is the specific listing of the companie(s) you agree not to seek employment with. A self-restraining order, in effect.
Often wrong but never in doubt.
I am Jack9.
Everyone knows me.