NonCompete Clause Law Suit

[FrogSplash]

My son was fired from a Florida telemarketing firm for not bringing in enough sales. No severance was paid. He joined another similar firm within a week, but was immediately sued by his former employer for violating a noncompete clause . The former employer is suing him for $15,000 damages including "trade secrets" and "stealing customers."

My son's new employers had hired several of the ex-employer's workers. All were sued. The new employer said they would fight to help the employees, but has recently fired all these employees after only a few months claiming they didn't make enough sales. My son are now left with no legal protection, but the ex-employer is still continiuing his suit.

Does this law suit have merit?

 

[Beth3]

Whether a non-compete is binding depends entirely on the wording of the agreement and the case law on this topic in the State your son is working in. Only an attorney practicing in Florida with experience in this area can advise you.

What I can tell you is that his most recent employer was under no obligation to have participated in defending the suit (the ex-employees are being sued, not the new employer), nor is their decision to discharge those particular individuals unlawful, as Florida is an "at will" State.

If the initial ex-employer is determined to pursue this suit, your son needs legal representation.

 

[FrogSplash]

Thank you very much for your helpful response to my question.
I have already checked lawyers in South Florida who specialize in such matters . They are listed here at this web site.

One more question, please. My son's first employer was in a so-called non-profit telemarketing credit counciling business. Does it make a difference? Can a non-profit sue an employee for a non-compete violation?

Also, my son was summarily fired for failing to meet sales quotas, watched while he packed his things, did not take a customer list or the telephone script. Does the employer have a basis for suing when my son took nothing with him to the new employer?

This first employer is also suing the second employer for "pirating" his fired employees.

 

[Beth3]

Here's the thing - I suspect your son's first employer is just being a jerk. It's costly to sue - whether they're actually going to go through with it or not or are just trying to "make some noise" to scare these ex-employees (and their employer into firing them, which they did) is unknown.

Again, whether the first employer has any basis to sue depends upon the wording of the non-compete. I really can't imagine what kind of "trade secrets" are involved in telemarketing - as far as I've experienced on the unfortunate receiving end of all these unwanted calls, all you need is a list of names and telephone numbers and a phone and some product to hawk. We're not talking patented R&D product designs here.

No, it makes no difference whether either of these business are for profit or not for profit. The laws and contract issues are equally applicable to both. Not for profit is just an internal financial/accounting issue. (Although I can't imagine why anyone would set up a not for profit telemarketing business but then I wouldn't have had telemarketers sign non-competes either - that's pretty ridiculous.)

 

[rentertooo]

This first employer is also suing the second employer for "pirating" his fired employees.


I would counter this with:

The second employer was not pirating employees, the employees heard what a wonderful place it is to work for the second employer from your son, so they left on their own accord.

The only time i know of that you can call it "pirating employees" if you pay them to quit their jobs, aka signing bonus.

 

[Beth3]

Paying a signing bonus has nothing to do with proving an employee was pirated.

The legal issue is whether one employer specifically targeted the employees of another company and hired them away for the purpose of harming the first employer's business. Then that employer might have a cause of action for tortious interference or the like.

 

[FrogSplash]

Again, I am so grateful for the responses and perspectives given above. Many thanks.

The non-compete clause my son signed upon being hired by his employer seems to be faulty. A copy he was given with the law suit had changes and hand written alterations, write- ins, some blanks, had the wrong name of the company ( one name on one page, another on some other pages) and strangest of all, the employer did not even sign his name in the space for his signature. There was something bogus about the notarized stamp, too. My hope is that the non-compete contract will not stand up in court because of these blantant deficiencies.

What do experts on contracts here think about the highly irregular contract? Would a judge be likely to accept it?

 

[Beth3]

Wow. That "contract" doesn't seem remotely enforceable, given what you've described. If the employer never signed it, then it wasn't even executed. Plus, not having the correct name of the company on it and making changes after your son signed it is just laughable.

Listen - you need to show that to an attorney. It sounds like there is every possiblity that an attorney will be able to obtain a summary judgement in favor of your son, which means once he shows that agreement to a judge, the judge will dismiss the case as having no merit. With any luck, the lawsuit won't proceed and there will be minimal legal expenses for you/your son.

 

[FrogSplash]

Thank you so much. I feel much better now and will e-mail this entire thread to my son. He has been under extreme stress about this entire sordid episode. I'm hoping the Florida Legal Aid Society will review the contract or suggest a moderately priced attorney who will do such a review.

Frankly, I just have to question the character of an employer who sues low-paid workers. It seems more like vindictive, mean spiritness than a sincere quest to protect his business. And imagine. The non-compete clause was for two years! Two years for a job that pays just above minimum wage! Two years for a telemarketer. Who knew they were such vital key employees? They should be paid like top executives...like Enron execs.