Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cbdkc1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!cbosgd!cbdkc1!fran
From: fran@cbdkc1.UUCP ( Frank Webb   3587)
Newsgroups: net.legal,net.jobs
Subject: Re: Employment Contract
Message-ID: <529@cbdkc1.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 3-Jun-84 21:49:16 EDT
Article-I.D.: cbdkc1.529
Posted: Sun Jun  3 21:49:16 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 5-Jun-84 20:01:35 EDT
References: <334@ut-sally.UUCP>, <662@abnjh.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Labs, Columbus
Lines: 23


The employment contract you showed will meet any court of law's
current interpretation.  The time period and the restrictions are
within the current readings of "reasonable", and the clause that the
courts can set a reasonable time or restriction should the current
definition prove too burdensome is a good cop-out.

The real question is whether your "livelihood" is jeapordized by the
restrictions.  If you are a programmer, and they try and keep you from
programming, then it will not stick.  If you are a programmer, and
they teach you, or provide the environment to learn, let's say,
robotics control, then they have the right to restrict your entry into
robotics control either in direct competition, or by being employed by
a competitor.

You have to determine whether you are going to learn enough for them
to want to enforce the contract.  If you are good, then it is in their
interest to keep you on the sidelines for a year until your stored
information is less valuable to you, and less threatening to them.
.
				Frank Webb
				cbdkc1!fran