Amazon Sues Former AWS VP Over Non-Compete Deal (geekwire.com)

Reader joshtops shares a report: Amazon.com is alleging that one of its former high-ranking executives violated a non-compete agreement when he accepted a job at Bellevue-based Smartsheet, GeekWire has learned. In a lawsuit filed Friday in King County Superior Court, Amazon alleges that Gene Farrell, who served as Vice President of the AWS Enterprise Applications -- EC2 Windows team, violated a non-compete agreement when he took the new job as head of product June 1 at the heavily-funded Bellevue online workplace collaboration platform. "This move is unthinkable," Amazon wrote in a motion for a temporary restraining order that would bar Farrell from working at Smartsheet. "he cannot possibly forget everything he knows about AWS's products and plans while he is working to develop products for its competitor." The suit also notes: "Farrell's role as "Head of Product" at Smartsheet will necessarily involve development of and strategy regarding competing cloud-based productivity products, including but not limited to those for project management, collaboration, and/or automation, and will therefore breach the Noncompetition Agreement and threaten the disclosure of Amazon's highly confidential information," Amazon wrote in its lawsuit.

Comments

Non-Compete Deal should be full pay and full benef

[Joe_Dragon]

Non-Compete Deal should be full pay with the same COL / pay raises that you should of gotten and full benefits for the term.

Did it involve Severance Pay?

[Anonymous Coward]

Frankly, any non-compete that does not involve severance pay for the duration of the non-compete should be illegal. It doesn't have to include benefits or bonuses, but it should be the same salary.

Most of the time the people involved do not have any information vital to the development of the product. As noted in the article, Amazon uses non-competes for unskilled, SEASONAL warehouse workers. This is done more often to intimidate people into not quitting rather than to protect the company.

If it is really important to the company, pay them severance for that time period. Otherwise, it is garbage.

Re:Did it involve Severance Pay?

[whoever57]

There is a simpler solution: work in California.

California law voids almost all non-compete agreements (the exceptions are quite specific and would not apply here). There are studies that show that the state benefits from banning non-competes.