Is my old contract valid when offered a new role with the same company?

General_Grant

lithium_101 said:

Mands said:

lithium_101 said:

 I guess my options are to negotiate the 6 month restraint with my current employer, 

Is there a geographical limitation within the clause? 

Hi Manda, there is reference to a Territory as below:
"Relevant Territory" means the area constituting the market for services of the Company.
I work in IT and the company services a global market place (as does my new employer). Is the use of Relevant Territory perhaps to ambiguous thus to restrictive? 
My new employers had their legal team check the non-compete clause (during the early stages of my application) and said the 6 month non-compete would be deemed unreasonable by a court given my contracted 4 week notice period. I don't have this in writing and this was not legal advise. I have a call lined up with an independent Solicitor on Monday for their input.
Thanks for taking the time to reply. 

So you could never work again on this earth except for your current employer?!
Slavery is illegal in this country.

Sandtree

General_Grant said:

lithium_101 said:

Mands said:

lithium_101 said:

 I guess my options are to negotiate the 6 month restraint with my current employer, 

Is there a geographical limitation within the clause? 

Hi Manda, there is reference to a Territory as below:
"Relevant Territory" means the area constituting the market for services of the Company.
I work in IT and the company services a global market place (as does my new employer). Is the use of Relevant Territory perhaps to ambiguous thus to restrictive? 
My new employers had their legal team check the non-compete clause (during the early stages of my application) and said the 6 month non-compete would be deemed unreasonable by a court given my contracted 4 week notice period. I don't have this in writing and this was not legal advise. I have a call lined up with an independent Solicitor on Monday for their input.
Thanks for taking the time to reply. 

So you could never work again on this earth except for your current employer?!
Slavery is illegal in this country.

It says 6 months not never.

There are always 2 considerations:
1) How enforceable is the clause
2) How likely are they to enforce it

On point one the broader the scope the less likely it is to be considered enforceable however this is tempered slightly by the nature of your role... if you are the Strategy Director of a bank a broad clause saying you cannot work for a competitor for 6 months of which half is covered by the 3 months of your garden leave may well be considered reasonable but probably not for the teaboy.

From a personal risk perspective, do they have a history of enforcing the clause? What inside information do you have that they may think could be valuable to a competitor - everyone focuses on sales guys for some reason on this one but the point is much wider than just customer details. An office junior working in the M&A team is probably more at risk than the head of the IT service desk.

Mands

lithium_101 said:

Mands said:

lithium_101 said:

 I guess my options are to negotiate the 6 month restraint with my current employer, 

Is there a geographical limitation within the clause? 

Hi Manda, there is reference to a Territory as below:
"Relevant Territory" means the area constituting the market for services of the Company.
I work in IT and the company services a global market place (as does my new employer). Is the use of Relevant Territory perhaps to ambiguous thus to restrictive? 
My new employers had their legal team check the non-compete clause (during the early stages of my application) and said the 6 month non-compete would be deemed unreasonable by a court given my contracted 4 week notice period. I don't have this in writing and this was not legal advise. I have a call lined up with an independent Solicitor on Monday for their input.
Thanks for taking the time to reply. 

So it's a 6 month restriction with no geographic limitation.  Pffft. 

As Sandtree says: On point one the broader the scope the less likely it is to be considered enforceable however this is tempered slightly by the nature of your role... if you are the Strategy Director of a bank a broad clause saying you cannot work for a competitor for 6 months of which half is covered by the 3 months of your garden leave may well be considered reasonable but probably not for the teaboy.

Broadly speaking are we looking at a £30k role or a £300k one?  Because the clause might be reasonable at the upper end of that scale but certainly not at the lower end.

This is one to discuss with your lawyer on Monday.  
Best of luck,
Mands

lithium_101

I had a call with an Employment Solicitor on Monday who largely echoed what had been discussed here.
My non-compete clause goes further than is necessary to protect the company’s interests and is unreasonable being as my role cannot influence a clients decision to enter into a business contract with us. My role is in a supporting capacity and nowhere near the £300k mark . 
I was advised to ask for written consent to work for the competitor and outline why the 6 month non-compete is unreasonable for my role. 
I have legal cover via my Home Insurance who will assess the case should it go to court (they will only take on the case if they think they could win). Given my independent Employment Solicitor and the legal team at my new employer both feel the non-compete clause is unreasonable, I feel more confident about my position (as well as all the useful input from you guys). 
Thanks! 

Mands

Updates if you feel able please?
Best of luck with it all,
Mands