In the previous three installments, we discussed how California law addresses contractual clauses that restrict post employment employee mobility and how the Department Of Justice (DOJ) sued and reached settlement with six Silicone Valley companies for signing anti-raiding provisions. In this final part of the four-part series, we explore the lessons to be learned from… Read More »
This is the third in a series of four articles discussing the DOJ’s settlement with six of Silicone Valley’s big high-tech companies. The settlement prohibits the companies from signing any Non-Solicitation of Employees agreement with any other company. However, the settlement did provide for certain exceptions to this general rule, some of which concur with… Read More »
Relying on the California court’s 1985 Moyes decision permitting anti-raiding provisions, at least six of Silicon Valley’s largest companies agreed to not hire each other’s employees. This collaboration backfired, however, when the Networks and Technology Section of the Department of Justice’s Anti-Trust Division filed an anti-trust suit against the companies. The Agreement From 2005 to… Read More »
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) recently sued and settled anti-trust violation claims against some of the biggest companies in Silicon Valley. The suit and settlement caught many legal pundits offguard because the California courts generally permit certain post-employment contractual restraints on soliciting employees. These restrictions are often called “anti-raiding,” “non-interference” or “no poaching” provisions…. Read More »
In the fourth and final part of our series on garden leave provisions, we present a discussion of the variables to be considered when drafting an enforceable garden leave provision. The Factors to Be Considered California law does not recognize most non-compete clauses. To enhance a garden leave provision’s acceptability to California courts, the following… Read More »
After presenting a background of garden leave provisions and the current status of California law, we are discussing challenges to garden leave clauses in part 3 of our four-part series. Declining to Enforce Garden Leave A United States District Court in Massachusetts declared that a 90-day garden leave provision amounted to “involuntary servitude” and declined… Read More »
In the second part of our series on garden leave provisions we are analyzing the current status of the law and how California is ripe for the acceptance of garden leave provisions. California Law California law prohibits the application of any post employment non-compete clauses. California Business & Professional Code § 16600 states that any… Read More »
California law prohibits employers from executing post employment non-compete or restrictive covenants with employees. This leaves many California businesses searching for ways to prevent its former employees from taking proprietary information and trade secrets acquired during their employment to the business’ competitors. This is the first of four articles exploring how “garden leave” clauses may… Read More »
Westendorf v. West Coast Contractors of Nevada, Inc. (9th Cir. April 1. 2013), Case No. 11-16004 The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the employer on a former employee’s “hostile work environment” claim. The appellate court held that a male coworker’s “crude and offensive” remarks were not severe or pervasive enough to alter employment conditions,… Read More »
Gonzalez v. Downtown LA Motors, LP California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Case No. B235292 (April 2, 2013) http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B235292.PDF The LA-based appellate court held that California’s minimum wage law requires an employer that compensates its automotive service technicians on a “piece-rate” basis for repair work to also pay the technicians a separate hourly minimum… Read More »
