Another legitimate case could be in the event of training

Another legitimate case could be in the event of training
by KeoughCharles05 (2024-04-23 23:56:36)

In reply to: Other than a non-compete imposed on the business owner posted by mwalsh

Supposing that an electrical company takes on unskilled workers to provide them with apprenticeship training, truly investing in their. Before investing a bunch of time and resources into this training project, the company might reasonably want some assurances that they'll get an ROI.

Both the company and the potential trainee are likely better off if the trainee can be prevented from leaving for a competitor immediately after the training is complete, as the trainee would receive the benefit of the on the job training, and the company would receive the benefit of reduced turnover if they invest in such training. As a general matter here, the entire industry would also likely benefit, as on-the-job training would likely be more beneficial than school-based training, so all companies would eventually have more, better-trained workers.

That exception seems subject to being too broadly applied

The incentive to train the employee well is in the best interest of the company regardless if the employee can leave. The ability to retain the employee is almost always within the control of the company by offering sufficient compensation, benefits, and culture, without the need to contractually prevent the employee from leaving. Sometimes employees leave, but more often than not whether they leave is within the company’s control.

Certainly

That is, certainly there's the potential for abuse, given subjective debates about what constitutes robust enough training. There's obviously real costs to taking on an untrained apprentice, and fully training them up in terms of both time, lost productivity, etc... But rules put in place to provide exceptions here could be gamed by employers to put in place sham training programs that don't require that much effort solely as a way to lock in new hires and depress wages.

I don't agree that the incentive is always there for the company to train well. There's an incentive to free-ride, not put in the effort in training, and then go poach employees with slightly higher pay because you don't have the underlying costs associated with training.