No. The idea is to stop people from acccepting a better deal to go work for a competitor. Non-competes applying when being fired or when your company gets shuttered, would leave the employees literally unable to work in their field no matter how their employment ended.
Even if that were how these contracts worked, good luck to ubisoft enforcing a non-compete for employees that worked for a legal entity that no longer exists.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let’s Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates.
(Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources.
If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
That’s why non-compete clauses are popular.
No. The idea is to stop people from acccepting a better deal to go work for a competitor. Non-competes applying when being fired or when your company gets shuttered, would leave the employees literally unable to work in their field no matter how their employment ended.
Even if that were how these contracts worked, good luck to ubisoft enforcing a non-compete for employees that worked for a legal entity that no longer exists.
Always depends on the lawyers they can afford
Non-competes often have a time period after employment, like one year or such.