Ryan Law Firm, PLLC’s Post

It should be obvious to everyone who reads this, you are putting the intellectual property rights of the corporation that you run over the intellectual property rights of every person affiliated with it. If you can explain to me why you are entitled to such over the needs of the many creators and contributors I'll accept your argument. Be advised though if you say job creation is more important you should consider that without employees there would be no company to create jobs in the first place.

The worst part of this post is your attempt to claim this is a victory for workers.

Bragging about this is such a bad idea. Most of the world does not accept non-compete clauses, for very good reasons: They hinder competition, they enable and perpetuate abuses of power on the part of companies, they disincentivize employees from applying or considering highly demanded positions.... If you couple this with an immigration system in the US that gives most power to the companies, you have a situation where worldwide talent will avoid going there, because they have no guarantee they won't be locked out of their career at the whim of an employer. Bad decision, bad idea, bad lawyers.

Amusing that you're claiming to defend "economic liberty" when you're... let me just check my notes... fighting against a worker's job mobility. This reads more like a desire for corporate feudalism rather than trying to protect your IP (do you know what NDAs are for?).

Maybe don’t treat your employees like garbage and then you won’t have to worry about people leaving the company. Simple as that. Give people a reason to stay for once and not just half a slice of pizza.

Non-competes just give lopsided power to the employer. Want to guess which business I’ll make sure to never do business with?

This is one of the most disingenuous things I have ever read on Linkedin. There is no altruistic or pro-employee case for these non-compete agreements. They have long been a tool not to protect small business from corporate espionage, but to prevent competition for talent by keeping employees unable to leave for a better job. It is one thing to say that the FTC may not have necessary legal authority to pass such sweeping regulations. Ideally it would go through Congress. But do not pretend that you are opposing the ban for reasons other than greed. We do not buy it.

I disagree. Non-compete clauses do nothing but harm employees and hurt 'little people' while protecting large corporations. Non-competes lock employees into jobs and prevent them from leaving, stifling innovation, and creating a situation of discrimination wherein a company that employs people in multiple states treat employees differently after they leave merely on the basis of where they live. This is unfair and the opposite of a free market!. Protecting intellectual property? Employees are not your intellectual property? You don't OWN them! They worked at your company. Once they leave of their own choice because they didn't like working there or another company offers them better pay they don't owe you anything. It's a free market -- remember we live in a CAPITALIST society? This is why NDAs exist. Screw non-competes and instead of worrying about employees leaving to your competitors focus on retaining employees by treating them well, giving them good benefits, and good pay! This post is honestly the biggest piece of corporate 💩 💩 💩 I have ever read. And the training you offer is for employees to do their job -- you're aren't doing me some kind of favor by offering me amazing training I couldn't get for free.