Non-Compete clauses for sandwich makers

[ksen]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...sandwich-makers-have-non-compete-clauses-now/

Capital has been stealing labor's lunch money the past 15 years, and, in related news, sandwich-makers at Jimmy John's sub chain now have to sign non-compete agreements.

That's right: Jimmy John's workers have to promise not to take any of the trade secrets they learned assembling subs to any nearby sandwich shop for at least two years, according to Huffington Post. This is what happens when workers have zero bargaining power.

No no no Wonkblog, this is what happens when you leave the free market alone to work its magic.

Non-compete clauses for entry-level sandwichmakers (and yoga instructors and pesticide sprayers and event planners and summer camp counselors) is a sign of a healthy, robust economy.

 

[coloradoatheist]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...sandwich-makers-have-non-compete-clauses-now/

Capital has been stealing labor's lunch money the past 15 years, and, in related news, sandwich-makers at Jimmy John's sub chain now have to sign non-compete agreements.

That's right: Jimmy John's workers have to promise not to take any of the trade secrets they learned assembling subs to any nearby sandwich shop for at least two years, according to Huffington Post. This is what happens when workers have zero bargaining power.

No no no Wonkblog, this is what happens when you leave the free market alone to work its magic.

Non-compete clauses for entry-level sandwichmakers (and yoga instructors and pesticide sprayers and event planners and summer camp counselors) is a sign of a healthy, robust economy.

I think the author should have just stuck with the main line of the article instead of going on a tangent rent. However I think it's stupid of Jimmy Johns to do this and I don't think there will be a 19 year old out there that will say, shit now I can't go work for Subway. Has there been a court case where Jimmy Johns has sued and won? A lot of these clauses have be nullified for a worker.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...sandwich-makers-have-non-compete-clauses-now/



No no no Wonkblog, this is what happens when you leave the free market alone to work its magic.

Non-compete clauses for entry-level sandwichmakers (and yoga instructors and pesticide sprayers and event planners and summer camp counselors) is a sign of a healthy, robust economy.

I think the author should have just stuck with the main line of the article instead of going on a tangent rent. However I think it's stupid of Jimmy Johns to do this and I don't think there will be a 19 year old out there that will say, shit now I can't go work for Subway. Has there been a court case where Jimmy Johns has sued and won? A lot of these clauses have be nullified for a worker.

Plenty! Minimum wage workers always take large corporations through long expensive litigations.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

I'd like to see them try to sue a minimum wage worker for this.

Congratulations Jimmy Johns you just won the lawsuit. Now this worker owes you $12 million... and makes $6k per year. Good luck collecting one red cent of that money.

 

[coloradoatheist]

I think the author should have just stuck with the main line of the article instead of going on a tangent rent. However I think it's stupid of Jimmy Johns to do this and I don't think there will be a 19 year old out there that will say, shit now I can't go work for Subway. Has there been a court case where Jimmy Johns has sued and won? A lot of these clauses have be nullified for a worker.

Plenty! Minimum wage workers always take large corporations through long expensive litigations.

Except in this case it would be Jimmy Johns bothering to sue that 19 year old going to work at Subway. I'm curious how often they have.

 

[ksen]

It's not about suing them. It's about using fear and intimidation tactics to keep them from making the jump in the first place.

- - - Updated - - -

Hey, hasn't one of the standard responses from the Right been something like, "Hey, if you don't like your current employer leave and go work for someone else!"?

Boss: I need you to work overtime today.

MW employee: Again? I haven't had a day off in three weeks!

Boss: Tough. Don't like it? Then go find another job.

A week later . . .

MW employee: I found another job so I quit.

Boss: Oh no you don't! You signed this non-compete agreement!

MW employee: *chokes on bag of dicks*

 

[coloradoatheist]

It's not about suing them. It's about using fear and intimidation tactics to keep them from making the jump in the first place.

- - - Updated - - -

Hey, hasn't one of the standard responses from the Right been something like, "Hey, if you don't like your current employer leave and go work for someone else!"?

Boss: I need you to work overtime today.

MW employee: Again? I haven't had a day off in three weeks!

Boss: Tough. Don't like it? Then go find another job.

A week later . . .

MW employee: I found another job so I quit.

Boss: Oh no you don't! You signed this non-compete agreement!

MW employee: *chokes on bag of dicks*

Except in this case its min wage jobs and the skills from making that sandwich aren't the skills that are only going to keep you in the sandwich industry. These are the types of jobs you do expect people to quit on whims.

 

[ksen]

Except in this case its min wage jobs and the skills from making that sandwich aren't the skills that are only going to keep you in the sandwich industry. These are the types of jobs you do expect people to quit on whims.

Not if you're the CEO of Jimmy John's.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So the right-wing supports the clause not because they support the clause, but because they don't think it is enforceable.

MEH!!!

 

[coloradoatheist]

Except in this case its min wage jobs and the skills from making that sandwich aren't the skills that are only going to keep you in the sandwich industry. These are the types of jobs you do expect people to quit on whims.

Not if you're the CEO of Jimmy John's.

Non compete clauses are more normal on higher management positions. Its the moving this down to all workers that's more of an issue in this case. I'm curious what percentage of the workers even knew they had a non-compete clause.

 

[Jokodo]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...sandwich-makers-have-non-compete-clauses-now/



No no no Wonkblog, this is what happens when you leave the free market alone to work its magic.

Non-compete clauses for entry-level sandwichmakers (and yoga instructors and pesticide sprayers and event planners and summer camp counselors) is a sign of a healthy, robust economy.

I think the author should have just stuck with the main line of the article instead of going on a tangent rent. However I think it's stupid of Jimmy Johns to do this and I don't think there will be a 19 year old out there that will say, shit now I can't go work for Subway. Has there been a court case where Jimmy Johns has sued and won? A lot of these clauses have be nullified for a worker.

A lot of 19 year olds are scared to shit of being dragged through courts even if they knew the case. Most probably aren't even aware that contract clauses can be nullified in the first place.

 

[coloradoatheist]

So the right-wing supports the clause not because they support the clause, but because they don't think it is enforceable.

MEH!!!

They would support it that when you have free choice to work at Jimmy Johns knowing that it will limit a few choices if you quit.

 

[Togo]

Not if you're the CEO of Jimmy John's.

Non compete clauses are more normal on higher management positions. Its the moving this down to all workers that's more of an issue in this case. I'm curious what percentage of the workers even knew they had a non-compete clause.

Not sure it really matters whether they know, or even if it is enforceable, since the problem is that other employers will be dissuaded from hiring them. What matters is that it is an anti-competitive clause. The employer is using their position of strength to add a clause to the employer's contract that serves no purpose other than to make it harder for other firms to compete with them for the labour of their employees.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

In Jimmy Js defense these folks do know a lot of trade secrets like where pickles come from and how to squeeze a mustard bottle.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

In Jimmy Js defense these folks do know a lot of trade secrets like where pickles come from and how to squeeze a mustard bottle.

I'm probably going to get sued for saying this, but the key concept behind sandwich making is bread, meat and then bread on top. Learn it while you can because this post is going to get deleted soon when the owners of the site are threatened with a lawsuit for being complicit in revealing corporate secrets.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Non compete clauses are more normal on higher management positions. Its the moving this down to all workers that's more of an issue in this case. I'm curious what percentage of the workers even knew they had a non-compete clause.

Not sure it really matters whether they know, or even if it is enforceable, since the problem is that other employers will be dissuaded from hiring them. What matters is that it is an anti-competitive clause. The employer is using their position of strength to add a clause to the employer's contract that serves no purpose other than to make it harder for other firms to compete with them for the labour of their employees.

Jimmy Johns hasn't commented I think but what probably happened was that they normally had this in for it's top people and just decided to add it all the way down. It's a very dumb move of them. Companies have a lot of proprietary information they don't want leaked out when someone leaves.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Not sure it really matters whether they know, or even if it is enforceable, since the problem is that other employers will be dissuaded from hiring them. What matters is that it is an anti-competitive clause. The employer is using their position of strength to add a clause to the employer's contract that serves no purpose other than to make it harder for other firms to compete with them for the labour of their employees.

Jimmy Johns hasn't commented I think but what probably happened was that they normally had this in for it's top people and just decided to add it all the way down. It's a very dumb move of them. Companies have a lot of proprietary information they don't want leaked out when someone leaves.

What possible trade secret could a sandwich maker have? They probably don't even have a clue what the dough is made of.

- - - Updated - - -

In Jimmy Js defense these folks do know a lot of trade secrets like where pickles come from and how to squeeze a mustard bottle.

I'm probably going to get sued for saying this, but the key concept behind sandwich making is bread, meat and then bread on top. Learn it while you can because this post is going to get deleted soon when the owners of the site are threatened with a lawsuit for being complicit in revealing corporate secrets.

Is it too late to patent the open face sandwich?

 

[ksen]

Not sure it really matters whether they know, or even if it is enforceable, since the problem is that other employers will be dissuaded from hiring them. What matters is that it is an anti-competitive clause. The employer is using their position of strength to add a clause to the employer's contract that serves no purpose other than to make it harder for other firms to compete with them for the labour of their employees.

Jimmy Johns hasn't commented I think but what probably happened was that they normally had this in for it's top people and just decided to add it all the way down. It's a very dumb move of them. Companies have a lot of proprietary information they don't want leaked out when someone leaves.

They haven't commented so you felt the need to come up with a scenario that tries to paint them in the best possible light? Makes sense.

I mean why would a company that's accused of stealing employee wages do something like this to their employees on purpose?

- - - Updated - - -

Is it too late to patent the open face sandwich?

Depends on if you gave enough to the right politician.

 

[Nexus]

Coloradoatheist all your posts in this thread have shown that you simply support more corporate power not the free market. This is usually the case with free market evangelists and libertarian types.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Coloradoatheist all your posts in this thread have shown that you simply support more corporate power not the free market. This is usually the case with free market evangelists and libertarian types.

In a free market, I as an individual decide if the conditions for employment are worth it. The skill level for the jobs at Jimmy Johns are not that hard to find in other jobs, that don't involve sandwiches.