I got a phone interview the other day and at the end of the conversation the recruiter asked me how I felt about signing a no compete clause if the offer was made? I told her I didn't have a problem with it, however the recruiter couldn't tell me anymore. They did say it would be for a year. I guess what struck a cord with me is that they said ,"...I would not be able to call on their accounts." Who are they kidding? I am an experienced rep and those are not "their accounts." Their anyone's account that calls on them. Does anyone know how these things work and when contested do they hold up in court? I mean do you really think a jury of your peers will tell you you can't go to work for another company and support your family? Just wondering what you all think.
Then ask them how much such a non-compete agreement is worth to them, especially because a non-compete protects THEIR interests, not yours. If you sign it, and leave the company, then you'd likely not be able to work for a competitor, so you'd be giving up the opportunity to earn a living in your field of specialty. I'd have an attorney review it, and give the expense to cov to re-imburse you, then i'd negotiate for the highest signon bonus in pharma history in exchange for helping them protect their own interests. don't let the industry take you down the path into a dark hole like that, giving up your opportunity to earn a living, a deal with the devil, protecting THEIR interests, just because the whole biz is in the sh*tter.
I know for a fact that non-compete clause will not hold up in California. You need to find out from an attorney what the deal is in your state. I signed one to get the job but have no fear of jumping ship to a competitor, if that's what's best for me.
I was also told about the non-compete clause. I advised them that I would have a problem with it. I assume that if they are interested in me, it is due to my experience selling pain products. Their "accounts" are no more theirs than they are mine, or Pfizers or Lilly's etc. Some doctors see you because of who you work for, others see you becuase it is you. Why would I agree to not call on these docs in my area of expertise should I leave Covidien because I learn that the job may not be that good after I start or should I be let go for some reason. Granted, I have another job so the risk is much larger than for those who are unemployed. If I were unexployed, I would probably sign it if the offer looked good. I would be careful with assuming that a non-compete is unenforceable. These are large companies with large legal departments. It is nothing for them to sue you even if they are wrong. It will cost you a lot of money to defend it even if it is unenforceable.
Which part of "know for a fact" a non-compete clause is unenforceable in California did you not get? Geez, you can google it and get a ton of info. Check it out and learn your rights -
Which part of "they have lawyers and you do not" did you not get. Apparently you have no legal background. You may know of one case but each case is different. Even then, it doesn't mean that a company will not sue you. Go ahead DB and spend thousands trying to defend why it isn't enforceable. Please, someone with a brain respond...
I can't believe I'm still arguing this with you BUT they are not legal and therefore cannot be enforced in Cali. I had several corporate lawyers as law professors in grad school who made it a point to make sure we at least got that much. No law can keep you from earning a living - they can only keep you from sharing company secrets that harm your previous employer. Make sense braintrust? I can't dumb in down anymore. Learn to use that google thing or walk into a bookstore - info is power. I wouldn't advise living a life afraid of "lawyers" , aren't you just as smart as they are? I know I am.
thanks for the posting as it's a valid dialogue. newbies might be intimidated by something like a "non-compete" and sign off on it anyway, regardless. Related note, in legal area,...not sure so i thought i'd post it anyway: doesn't the Cov HR dept have a responsibility to respond back to candidates that have evidently "Failed" the ddi test, and will not be considered further? After all, the Cov test DID ask questions about "you agree that this test will not be the sole basis for whether or not you get hired by Covidien". for folks that "failed" the assessment, it seems to me that the test WAS in fact, the only criteria used. I'm well qualified, award winner, no rookie here, internal advisory panels, etc etc, but didn't even get an interview. (however, take a look at the poster in other thread that's all set for f2f on Jan 4th, after being laid off for 12 months. It would be funny if Covididien used her own Cafepharma post as a basis for her f2f interview "how often do you post on CP? Will you be badnmouthing covidien at teh first gray cloud? etc etc."). Anyway, just curious, as it seems like Cov HR doesn't even get to see the reseumes of candidates that fail the DDI. Seems odd to receive ZERO response to a job application when my understanding is that the proper process is for an employer to close the loop and say "thank but not thanks" at some point. For fun. take a look at the OP in the "f2f in Atlanta" thread. sheer genius new hire there ! "look at me everyone..look at me..im posting on Cafepharma and here's what they said to meeeeee !!!!" LOL. !
I agree with this statement for one reason; it is known that the larger pharmaceutical companies will file an injunction when a competitor goes to market with generic equivalent of the brand name medicine that that original company had developed. Of course their claims have no merit, but because it has to be reviewed [each time] it means that the generic drug company may be legally required to cease production and sales of a medicine for up to 180 days. If you've produced a huge amount of medicines for market, imagine how detrimental that could be to cash flow to the new company.
Be wary of Covidien and their non-compete. (and their Legal Team) I signed one with my entire new hire package (1 year). After 9 months of joining the company, they brought in a new, inexperienced VP in my area. An offer came forward from a competitor through a recruiter that was far and above the COV package. Covidien is a decent company but in my specialty, I would be banging my head against the wall, I went through the process with the other company. Long story short; I left and joined the other organization... and our Legal COV friends made my life hell for the next 12 months. (have heard from them in 2, so I'm assuming that the big "Trade Secrets" (of which I had no technical knowledge) were now mute. However, it has not put me in very good light with my new company. My mistake. What a mess. Again, just be wary.
Anyone else here had experience with Covidien's non-compete agreement? Understanding is no direct competitor within two years in same geography. Has anyone been in a situation where the company agreed not to pursue, or made a move in the face of the agreement with/without repercussion?
If you worked here you know the company is so poorly ran and in such shitty shape unless you tell them you are working for a competitor I highly doubt the all star shit heads will be able to find out. Keep your mouth shut and just got for whatever opportunity you can. Fuck covidien.
They are a form of intimidation. Sign it and move on. Do you really think Brian is that smart. He doesn't impress me.
For what it is worth, don't sign it and don't take the job. It is a TERRIBLE company. Keep looking! There are jobs out there.
COV uses relocation and non competes to control employees. It is horrible and they know it - rather than fix the problems, they handcuff you. And they do enforce anything they can.
Pharma side has a no compete clause? News to me, guess I started before they enacted one. Never signed one when I was hired.
