Re: Question about non-compete clauses

[mwaters@mail.wesleyan.edu (Martin J. Waters)]

>R.L. Caron wrote:
>Not exactly. The new Maine law says covenants not to compete between
>employers and broadcast talent "are presumed to be unreasonable."
<snip>

        A few Sundays ago, Neil Chayette (sp?),with the great Looking at
the Law show Sundays on WBZ, talked about non-competes. He mentioned that
AFTRA at some recent time got them banned under its radio contracts. But
the way he said this would give the impression to listeners that 99 percent
of all radio people are under AFTRA contracts, so I thought that little bit
of it was misleading. And I don't know if he meant AFTRA nationally or in
Boston.

        To his great credit, however, he always rants against these
clauses, in any industry, and I think he essentially would support
legislation outlawing them. He basically holds the position that in the
meantime, in almost all cases, they *should* be considered unreasonable by
the courts and therefore invalid, even though that's not how the rulings go
many times.

        His caller was someone in the construction industry who, after
being with a company for several months, suddenly was being "asked" to sign
a ridiculous non-compete -- two or three years, within 100 or 200 miles,
etc., and prohibiting any work for any company engaged in, like, anything
to do with construction. I was worried about Mr. Chayette's blood pressure
<g>.