
WeWork Backs Down on Employee Noncompete Requirements - chrisaycock
https://www.npr.org/2018/09/18/648881004/wework-backs-down-on-employee-noncompete-requirements
======
jedberg
So in the last little while, we've learned that WeWork has/had oppressive non-
compete clauses, and will no longer allow anyone to expense anything involving
the consumption of meat.

This is odd to me, because the people I know who work for them love their job
and employer, but it seems like they're moving down a dark path...

~~~
anonweworker
(regular HNer here, posting anonymously for obvious reasons). I work for
WeWork, and you don't know the half of it. In mid-August WeWork had their
"Summer Camp" event, which was a three day all-hands company meeting in
England. About 5500 of 7000 WeWork employees were flown into Heathrow and
shipped out to a campground in Tunbridge Wells. Everyone was required to sleep
in a tent, generally with four or five other tent mates, on air mattresses on
the ground with thin mattresses.

Because of the vegetarianism thing, everyone was forced to eat WeWork-provided
food, sans meat (though fish is okay!). This totally broke my ketogenic diet,
which made me quite mad. See other comments about this being a form of group
control.

For the first day and a half, we were subjected to a number of corporate
"talks" which largely revolved around the cult of personalities of Adam
Neumann and Miguel McKelvey. Adam Neumann particularly styles himself a
televangelis or Jesus-wannabe and walks out into the audience, asking people
about their deepest fears, delivering some ersatz corprorate sermon on the
mount. There is no "me", only "we".

See also the time when Rebecca Neumann commands the gathered WeWorkers to hold
hands, close their eyes, and pray.

Or the time that Deepak Chopra comes out and shows a disturbing video about
childbirth (people were like, "is this an anti-abortion video?) and talks
about how evolution and child development are intimately related, and how we
should take our shoes off to let the ions flow, and leads a meditation
session.

A fish rots from the head down, and this is one crazy fish.

~~~
djsumdog
> Everyone was required to sleep in a tent, generally with four or five other
> tent mates, on air mattresses on the ground with thin mattresses.

I prefer keto diets too, but I think this would piss me off way more. I have
really bad OCD. I wash my hands a lot; coworkers notice. I'm already self
conscious about it. I can go camping but it takes a lot of mental prep (and I
typically throw everything in the wash or away when I get home).

If a company forced me to camp like that .. da fuck?!

Not to mention everything else about that sounds pretty insane too.

~~~
village-idiot
I love camping, away from everyone else. If you made me camp with my coworkers
I would not be happy either.

------
djsumdog
This is really good to hear. WeWork has multiple office spaces in my city and
I was not aware their full time staff had to sign non-competes. This seems
insane considering their entire business is to provide space for freelancers
and startups.

I've refused to sign non-competes myself, and have written about it
previously[1]. In the past it really hasn't been a problem. People have
typically changed their contracts when I bring it up. But in the past year, I
had to walk away from two different jobs because of their refusal to remove
non-compete language from their contracts.

Are there any groups working on getting national/federal regulations changed
to invalidate or ban non-compete agreements? I'd want to contribute to such
causes.

[1]: [https://penguindreams.org/blog/why-i-dont-sign-non-
competes/](https://penguindreams.org/blog/why-i-dont-sign-non-competes/)

~~~
ams6110
> Are there any groups working on getting national/federal regulations changed
> to invalidate or ban non-compete agreements?

I don't know if there are, but the idea seems like a complete non-starter in
the USA. I don't see any reason to forbid two willing parties from entering
into an agreement that includes a non-compete provision.

I can _maybe_ see some rationale for restrictions in standard employment
situations. But for contract work? If you don't like the terms, don't accept.

~~~
kanelbullar
_two willing parties_

Please, this is a very old topic.

The way society is currently configured, at some point, for all practical
purposes, you are effectively forced to take _some_ kind of job. Or see your
life turn into living hell in a whole bunch of ways. Which means that the idea
that both parties are truly "willing" parties (let alone have more or less
equal leverage in) the negotiation, at the very least -- needs to be radically
revisited.

 _But for contract work? If you don 't like the terms, don't accept._

"And don't pay the rent, and don't feed your kids" you mean.

~~~
djsumdog
The Mic Dicta podcast has a great commentary about this in one of their recent
episodes about a labour dispute; they referred to a judge (can't remember if
it was SCOTUS or a Federal court) and said, "He's never had a real job in his
life."

Work contracts are not a negotiation. There is no back and fourth to an
agreement. I've gotten non-competes removed from some contracts, but I'm an
exception because 1) I'm in IT and highly skilled and 2) I actually read my
contracts.

And even then, in two cases they wouldn't change anything about the contracts
and I had to walk from those jobs. Anyone who doesn't work in tech or another
high income job does NOT have that option.

Work contracts in western countries are rarely ever between equal parities.

------
Latteland
The article says the noncompetes will stay for 100 executive level employees.
Executive level and they have 100 of them? My experience tells me they
probably have the devs listed as fake executives like at a lot of companies so
they don't have to pay them overtime. Is that what is really going on here?

Noncompetes are terrible and places without them do very well, California
being the best example. Everyone should work to get rid of them.

~~~
pmiller2
Devs as fake executives? I’ve never heard of that specifically. Devs are often
FLSA exempt employees due to their professional status, but that’s usually
accurate. The effect of being FLSA exempt is that they aren’t paid overtime,
but that’s just the law operating as intended.

~~~
Latteland
I've personally known a couple of people that worked in NYC for big financial
companies, and this was a known dodge. They even had a separate washroom and
cafeteria for the real executives. I don't know the precise details, but I
noticed that a software engineer colleague at a company had something on his
resume about "vice president" on his resume at 'big finance co' and asked for
the details.

~~~
Spooky23
That’s just the way banks work. VPs are managers everywhere else.

My dad knew a good old boy type guy who had an epic VP of X title. His job
duties consisted of buying a dozen different newspapers at the airport and
matching obituaries and reports of deaths with safe deposit box holders before
9:30AM.

~~~
clamprecht
Sounds like a great subscription business right there. Charge $X per month to
aggregate obituaries and make them searchable or matchable to a list every
day. You just replaced a $60k/year employee.

------
jorblumesea
We need a new labor movement. The control corporations have over the average
worker is getting troublesome for society. Between non compete clauses,
cartel-like salary caps and anti-union stances, no wonder real wages haven't
risen in decades. While great for the capital classes, it is long term
detrimental to the stability of society.

~~~
knightofmars
I'm not sure whey you're getting down voted. Everything you said contributes
to wage problems.

~~~
Ensorceled
Many people have been convinced that the labour movement is evil. Including
those that would benefit from being unionized.

Actually, especially those who would benefit.

~~~
ryandrake
You’ll always get a handful of downvotes here by mentioning anything positive
about organized labor or use the U-word. It’s as reliable as the sun. Best not
to sweat it.

~~~
gaius
It’s time based. If I say anything about it it will be upvoted in European
hours and downvoted as soon as the West Coast comes online.

------
sixtypoundhound
Seriously? Non Competes for Janitors and Baristas?

At what point do we call this what it is: bullying.

~~~
jedberg
I'm betting the janitors don't actually work for them, but for a contractor.

~~~
chipotle_coyote
While that would seem likely to me, too, that would make non-compete
agreements _from WeWork_ enforced against such contractors seem even more
ridiculous. Of course, white collar contractors get stuck with such clauses
frequently (which also seems bogus, particularly in "right to work" states).

~~~
jedberg
I think the non-compete only applies to employees. They have a large staff of
full time people that do things like plan events, manage social media, real
estate transactions, and so on.

------
sct202
Non-competes should not be allowed unless the employer is willing the pay the
former employee to enforce it.

~~~
stordoff
This is referred to as gardening leave in the UK:

> Garden leave describes the practice whereby an employee leaving a job –
> having resigned or otherwise had their employment terminated – is instructed
> to stay away from work during the notice period, while still remaining on
> the payroll. [...] Employees continue to receive their normal pay during
> garden leave and must adhere to their conditions of employment, such as
> confidentiality, at least until their notice period expires.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden_leave](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden_leave)

------
Rotdhizon
Aren't most non-compete clauses just HR stunts? Every time I hear about some
company trying to get employees to sign them, that's almost always followed up
by a statement saying it would fall apart if it were taken to court.

TIL: Non-compete clauses are the devil and actively screw people over.

~~~
ericand
Perhaps you are thinking of California? This is certainly true in California,
but I've seen non-competes enforced in the tech sector elsewhere in the US
(Seattle, Utah, etc).

~~~
djsumdog
California law goes as far as to state you can't have a non-compete agreement
in the work contract at all. When I worked in Seattle, my contract had a non-
compete that specifically said it didn't apply in California, and then the
fucking staffing agency tried to tell me it wasn't a non-compete.

I called Bullshit! It explicitly excludes your California office! Don't try to
lie to me!

~~~
Latteland
I am in exactly this situation working in Seattle for a Cali company.

------
Nasrudith
Noncompetes need to die in a fire. They are defacto parasitic to the economy.
The government should be promoting competition not limiting it by wasting
resources enforcing leonine contracts to actively make the economy worse.

------
tchbos
They should write about companies applying non-compete clauses to doctors.
It's actually causing problems with public health.

It requires doctors to relocate to another state entirely to practice
especially if what they do is specialized.

------
expertentipp
"right to work", "impossibility to renounce the right to work" should be
written down somewhere in the basic rights or even in the constitutions. In
the reality of visas, protectionism, various barriers, employability is one
the highest values one can have to offer on the job market.

------
creativeembassy
This is what I've heard (at least in Pennsylvania where I work, and from a
number of family members and friends working in different HR departments.)
IANAL.

Non-competes are unenforceable because you cannot take away someone's right to
work. I'm talking even about switching to your previous employer's competitor.
Say you're a software engineer with a lot of domain knowledge on heavy
construction. And that employer lets you go (for whatever reason). If there's
one other heavy construction company within driving distance hiring software
engineers, neither the state nor your previous employer can keep you from
using your talents to make a living for yourself.

The only exception is in NDA's. You can't take proprietary information with
you, whether it's source code or sales leads.

~~~
pnw_hazor
Different states have different laws. Generally, non-competes are enforceable
as long as they have reasonable geographic limits and reasonable time limits.
There is usually no "right to work" exceptions -- I have never heard of one
anyway.

And the definition of reasonable duration or reasonable geographic limits
depends on the job and the industry.

------
s73v3r_
Non-competes offer no benefits whatsoever to employees, and should be banned
outright. There is zero legitimate reason that an employer should have any say
whatsoever on what someone does after that employer stops paying them.

~~~
jaxtellerSoA
>should be banned outright

almost but not quite.

> there is zero legitimate reason that an employer should have any say
> whatsoever on what someone does after that employer stops paying them.

Agreed.

However, non-competes make prefect sense when a company is bought/sold. If I
own a Marketing firm, and sell it to you, it would be perfectly reasonable, as
part of that sale, for you to require me to sign a non-compete. Otherwise I
could rent an office across town, call up all my old customers (the ones you
just payed a lot of money to get) and convince them to switch to my new
company and leave you high and dry.

~~~
Finnucane
But that's not a condition of employment, that's a deal you make as a business
owner. As a condition of employment, it has no reason to exist other than as a
tool for businesses to abuse workers.

~~~
jaxtellerSoA
100% agree that as a condition of employment it makes zero sense.

