Relationships with outgoing staff can be difficult. This is why many companies ask certain employees – especially those who have access to confidential information or business owners or customers – to sign written agreements prohibiting them from committing various acts of unfair competition after leaving the company. While Oklahoma`s law favors confidentiality and anti-raiding agreements, employers often encounter difficulties with other types of restrictive alliances. In the employment context, for example, non-competitive agreements prohibiting a worker from working for a competitor are prohibited by law. On the other hand, non-invitation agreements – agreements that prohibit employees from recruiting clients or clients of their former employers – are permitted, but only if the agreement prohibits “direct” requests from “historical customers.” Courts in Oklahoma have generally requested that both restrictions be strictly adhered to for non-invitation agreements. This trend continued in a case recently decided by the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals. Restrictive employment pacts are not and should not be constituent agreements. Employers and workers should consider the impact that a restrictive employment pact can have on both parties when a employment relationship ends badly. Employers should seek help before developing restrictive employment pacts to ensure they are applicable and workers should seek the help of a consultant before signing such restrictive employment pacts, so that they fully understand the effect of this agreement. […] not be treated the same in all states. For example, a non-compete agreement in Oklahoma, with limited conditions, is essentially non-hazard.
But in the state of Pennsylvania, the law is very different. . . . It is significant that the text of the statute appears to permit only the non-demand of workers or independent contractors, and not prohibitions on hiring or employing such persons. This would be consistent with the Oklahoma Supreme Court`s analysis at Howard, where he considered a non-request from staff that also prohibited the recruitment of employees who may never have actually been solicited. Oklahoma`s new law appears to be in competition with California`s non-compete bans, which allow workers not to be asked for alliances, but which generally prohibit a halt to rents or counter-employment. (See Loral Corp. v.
Moyes, 174 Cal. App.3d 268 (1985)). […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Physboy and Shawn Roberts, Shawn J Roberts. Shawn J Roberts said: Is my non-competition clause applicable? ht.ly/2Qmjx #FreeStyleFriday […] Employers have a legitimate interest in protecting their business as much as possible when employees leave the company with business and customer information.