Restraint of Trade Clauses

Forums › Off topic › Restraint of Trade Clauses

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

42 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 34

#2855832 24-Jan-2022 17:45

Not a fan of restraint of trade, and would prefer they were illegal, but in this case we are not talking a low paid worker with no literacy skills who signed a contract because they had no other choice. Someone whos face is on every new bulletin covering the running of the country presumably understood and accepted the contact they signed. Pity the this case is being compared of minimum wage workers who cannot afford to move jobs because of these clauses - i.e. state sponsored modern day slavery.

Handle9

11925 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9675

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2855856 24-Jan-2022 19:49

Senecio:

I can understand a restraint of trade clause for senior level execs, directors and board members. These people hold information that could be used against the current business if that individual decided to start their own business. A bog standard employee should never be subject to a restraint of trade.

I'd generally agree. I'd also add in there sales people who directly approach their existing customers. A time limited restraint of trade is reasonable.

If the ex-employer chooses to activate a restraint of trade I think there should be appropriate compensation. If you want to stop me working for a competitor then you should pay me for the time I am restrained.

insane

3324 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1006

ID Verified

Trusted

2degrees

Subscriber

#2855858 24-Jan-2022 19:59

This should all make it easier for Jacinda, now she only needs to field questions from Jessica :P

Handle9

11925 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9675

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2855860 24-Jan-2022 20:06

insane: This should all make it easier for Jacinda, now she only needs to field questions from Jessica :P

Barry will still be upset, he’s got a deadline you know?

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2855875 24-Jan-2022 21:55

If you take legal advice and exercise your free will to sign the contract then how can you have the temerity to complain?

The parties to the contract were adults entering into the terms freely and without coercion. You cannot then complain you did not understand. I wonder if there is another similar clause in her new contract...

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2855876 24-Jan-2022 21:56

Handle9:

Senecio:

I can understand a restraint of trade clause for senior level execs, directors and board members. These people hold information that could be used against the current business if that individual decided to start their own business. A bog standard employee should never be subject to a restraint of trade.

I'd generally agree. I'd also add in there sales people who directly approach their existing customers. A time limited restraint of trade is reasonable.

If the ex-employer chooses to activate a restraint of trade I think there should be appropriate compensation. If you want to stop me working for a competitor then you should pay me for the time I am restrained.

Why? Did I force you to work for me or to sign your contract?

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2855877 24-Jan-2022 22:00

nzmatt:

Not a fan of restraint of trade, and would prefer they were illegal, but in this case we are not talking a low paid worker with no literacy skills who signed a contract because they had no other choice. Someone whos face is on every new bulletin covering the running of the country presumably understood and accepted the contact they signed. Pity the this case is being compared of minimum wage workers who cannot afford to move jobs because of these clauses - i.e. state sponsored modern day slavery.

In what low paid jobs would they insert a clause like this and why?

In the actual case at hand, she even took legal advice according to the report I read.

I signed a contract last year that includes such a clause and which the organisation will most definitely enforce. I took legal advice on the entirety of the contract for peace of mind and accepted that if I wanted the work, I would be bound by the terms - just as you would be for a mortgage, a credit card, a car sale, house sale or anything else.

nzmatt

42 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 34

#2855884 24-Jan-2022 22:36

Common in minimum wage jobs - seamstresses is an example cited in the media in the last day or two, I have heard it applied to baristas. People need to work to pay the bills, and unlike this case, cannot afford a lawyer. They cannot change jobs because they have limited skills that the restraint of trade prevents them using, and at $20 (or a little more) an hour, have no savings to fall back on.

quickymart

14940 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 13954

ID Verified

#2855889 24-Jan-2022 23:04

Handle9:

I'd generally agree. I'd also add in there sales people who directly approach their existing customers. A time limited restraint of trade is reasonable.

If the ex-employer chooses to activate a restraint of trade I think there should be appropriate compensation. If you want to stop me working for a competitor then you should pay me for the time I am restrained.

You mean like "gardening leave" or something else?

Handle9

11925 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9675

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2855892 24-Jan-2022 23:14

quickymart:
Handle9:

I'd generally agree. I'd also add in there sales people who directly approach their existing customers. A time limited restraint of trade is reasonable.

If the ex-employer chooses to activate a restraint of trade I think there should be appropriate compensation. If you want to stop me working for a competitor then you should pay me for the time I am restrained.

You mean like "gardening leave" or something else?

Gardening leave is when you are still employed but essentially the same concept.

Handle9

11925 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9675

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2855905 24-Jan-2022 23:24

Geektastic:
Handle9:

I'd generally agree. I'd also add in there sales people who directly approach their existing customers. A time limited restraint of trade is reasonable.

If the ex-employer chooses to activate a restraint of trade I think there should be appropriate compensation. If you want to stop me working for a competitor then you should pay me for the time I am restrained.

Why? Did I force you to work for me or to sign your contract?

There’s any number of power imbalances in employment matters which is why employment law has somewhat different rules to general contract law.

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

insane

3324 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1006

ID Verified

Trusted

2degrees

Subscriber

#2855906 24-Jan-2022 23:33

Geektastic:
If you take legal advice and exercise your free will to sign the contract then how can you have the temerity to complain?

The parties to the contract were adults entering into the terms freely and without coercion. You cannot then complain you did not understand. I wonder if there is another similar clause in her new contract...

It gives her an easy topic to talk about on radio that everyone will know, and every news cycle helps to promote her new show. They are milking this for all its worth and then some. If this happened to me and I emailed the news room I probably wouldn't even get a reply.

Im also sure she has enough money or credit to last out two months without pay.

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2855910 25-Jan-2022 00:07

insane:
Geektastic:

If you take legal advice and exercise your free will to sign the contract then how can you have the temerity to complain?

The parties to the contract were adults entering into the terms freely and without coercion. You cannot then complain you did not understand. I wonder if there is another similar clause in her new contract...

It gives her an easy topic to talk about on radio that everyone will know, and every news cycle helps to promote her new show. They are milking this for all its worth and then some. If this happened to me and I emailed the news room I probably wouldn't even get a reply.

Im also sure she has enough money or credit to last out two months without pay.

Agreed. I rolled my eyes when she was reported as being "devastated" by this.

You are devastated when your parent dies. This? Mildly annoying, frustrating and an expensive lawyers bill - but "devastating"? Get a grip.

Goosey

3016 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 871

Subscriber

#2855917 25-Jan-2022 06:48

Im not 100% about Tova's approach here.

Said new role would have been in the "pipeline" for quite somtime and said new boss would have known longer.

You cant tell me they all considered this but yet assumed it was still going to be ok?

I guess Tova didnt want to take a 2 month holiday and new boss didn't want to pay her equivalent in some sort of negociation..... which should have been the case.

Greed vs I want it all (hang on....thats the same) vs making the right moves.

EDIT: theres many an example of people in Media jumping boats....

EDIT2: in a form of conspiracy.... did said boss know this and was happy to risk her joining the show...."just to see if it still stood up on its own".

quickymart

14940 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 13954

ID Verified

#2855919 25-Jan-2022 07:14

I think she did think the two were different things, but (as someone who casually works in the media) I can see both sides - however Discovery (TV3) may have a stronger point; she will be competing against their new show, as well as ZB and National Radio.

Anyway she's got a couple of months break now, so let's see what happens next.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4