can a business say you cant contact any of their clients after leaving.

andy.m_2

it is a standard clause that has stood up to the test of time for a number of years now.

Either:
It has been challenged, albeit unsuccessfully or
not challenged as it is deemed to be perfectly by everybody else

Ihatecameron

andy.m wrote: »

it is a standard clause that has stood up to the test of time for a number of years now.

Either:
It has been challenged, albeit unsuccessfully or
not challenged as it is deemed to be perfectly by everybody else

You say it is a standard clause, I have never heard of it before today.

I think it remains to be seen if it is reasonable to prevent someone from taking a job on the off chance they might meet a former client.

andy.m_2

That's not why the clause was brought about.

It was brought about to prevent somebody with a hefty client portfolio from jacking their job, taking another job and taking the clients with them.
Thereby company A lose clients and company B have bought a new client list.

It has been about for years now, certainly in my line of work (construction) we get to meet a lot of agency reps who chop and change jobs and we shouldn't follow the rep but go back to the company.

It is not designed to stop people from moving to a similar role in another firm whereby they may meet or speek to a former client, it is designed to stop people poaching clients.

Otherwise somebody might build a huge client list and just jump firms for a massive pay rise on the basis that they are bringing a ton of sauce to the table

Savvy_Sue

One reason why it might not be enforceable if is if stops you earning a living. Whether this one is enforceable is unclear to me, but it's there for the reasons stated.

Ihatecameron

That's not why the clause was brought about.

I can see how it would apply if the OP left to set up a rival company, the question is what happens when the OP gets job with a company in the same sector, I can't see how it can apply in that instance.

bap98189

Ihatecameron wrote: »

You say it is a standard clause, I have never heard of it before today.

It's certainly not new. I have such a clause in my contract.

Ihatecameron wrote: »

I think it remains to be seen if it is reasonable to prevent someone from taking a job on the off chance they might meet a former client.

It would not prevent you taking a new job at all. It's about what is reasonable. Meeting a former client who is a friend for a drink, talking to them at a conference or bumping into them in the street would be perfectly reasonable (and highly likely if you go to a new job in a similar industry).

Contacting them directly to try to persuade them to move their business to your new employer would be considered unreasonable.

Pete111

Ihatecameron wrote: »

You say it is a standard clause, I have never heard of it before today.

I think it remains to be seen if it is reasonable to prevent someone from taking a job on the off chance they might meet a former client.

Well I have...and I'm an HR Director...

This type of clause if there for the reasons other posters have mentioned - ie to make employees think very carefully about poaching either staff or business when they leave.

That said however it would ultimately fall to an employment tribunal or other court (in case of a contract law dispute) to decide what was reasonable in each individual case. For me the clause as described appears a little too harsh in terms of both scope of restriction and length of time involved to be deemed 100% reasonable.

However, only a court/tribunal could decide and ultimately OP, you signed up to it...

meluvnext

its only 6 months really, not a life time, the thing is my ex employer would not think of trying to poach clients from another company. They dont have many clients to start with. I am still friendly with a few clients, they asked me to keep in touch which I do. It is inevitable you are going to build up a friendship with some people who you may be talking to almost every weekend. I would never dream of trying to take clients away from another business, in fact many of the clients they used anyways used several agencies and did not restrict themselves to one agency.

Pete111

Ihatecameron wrote: »

I can see how it would apply if the OP left to set up a rival company, the question is what happens when the OP gets job with a company in the same sector, I can't see how it can apply in that instance.

Seriously? You can't see who a company that employs an individual may wish to deter them from taking the clients/business they have gained whilst under that companies wing should they wish to jump ship to a direct rival?!

Mrs_Arcanum

Hairdressers even have area exclusions so you cannot go & set up or work for a rival salon within a reasonable distance to avoid losing clients.

However OP you were forced to leave your job unfairly as your circumstances (caring for a disabled person) are covered by the new Equality Act 2010.