Why Non-Competes are Unnecessary

Why Non-Competes are Unnecessary

Why Non-Competes are Unnecessary 150 150 Lauren Ellerman

There is a tremendous letter to the editor in the Richmond Times Dispatch on HB 1187. Says Arlington resident Todd Benjamin:

After a non-compete sidelined me last year, I educated myself about these agreements and have become a staunch advocate for their elimination. … I believe in free markets: for products, for services and for labor. A non-compete agreement is, by definition, contrary to such American values. Restricting workers’ rights to pursue their careers goes against the self-determination on which our country was founded.

For those of you who have been faced with a non-compete, these sentiments will not be unfamiliar. For those who have not, but lean towards the right assuming that such agreements are necessary to protect business, I beg you to consider Mr. Benjamin’s well reasoned points.

Is it just or fair for an individual to lose his or her job and be forced to move? Sell a house that won’t sell, all because of a non-compete agreement signed years before?

What if he or she was fired? Or the employer lost the bid for work and had no work for the employees to do? Would you still support non-compete as being just, valid and fair?

Or perhaps would you support a bill that opposes non-competition agreements in Virginia.

I know I do.

Well said, Mr. Benjamin. Well said.

About the author

Lauren Ellerman

In 2011, Lauren Ellerman was named "Young Lawyer of the Year" by the Roanoke Bar Association for her work in the community. To speak with Lauren about your personal injury case, contact her at lellerman@frithlawfirm.com.

Back to top