Contract: Restrictions on future employment with a direct competitor

[lz1]

Is it legal for an employer to put the following in a contract of employment;

"You may not accept a position of employment with a direct competitor company until after one year of termination of employment contract with this company."

Thankx

 

[FeuFollet]

Re: Contract of employment

Yes and it is quite commom too. You could negotiate the exact terms because this phrase is very vague - like: "You may not accept a similar position of employment with a direct competitor company in the Telecommunications sector" or "... in the sales department of a direct competitor..."

Depending on your skills this could be more or less important. If you specialise in accounting software development, not being able to woirk in your field for a year could mean starvation. Would you have other skills to allow you to cross over to another industry?

 

[ClubMan]

Re: Contract of employment

Clauses such as that are common in contracts of employment but in many cases an employer would find it difficult, if not impossible, to enforce it due to EU/Irish legislation protecting the individual's right to earn a living (e.g. ) assuming that they were prepared to resort to law in an attempt to do so (most will no due to the time and expense involved). Obviously in a case where an employee stole information and brought it to a competing employer there would be other issues but simply working for a competing company cannot be prevented in general as far as I know no matter what the contract of employment states (i.e. one's statutory rights in this context cannot be abrogated even by a contractual agreement). I am not a lawyer though.

 

[RainyDay]

Re: Contract of employment

I read press reports earlier this year where O2 took an action against a former pricing analyst who left O2 to join Vodafone at a time when she would have prior knowledge of the new O2 pricing structures. Don't know where the case ended up.

 

[lz1]

On questioning my new employer on the need for this clause they removed it without too much of a fight.

Thanks for all the replies