Found out my non-compete might not hold up in court, but my lawyer says different?

I was reading through some state labor board rulings from Washington last night and saw that 3 non-compete agreements got thrown out because they restricted "low-wage workers" making under $100k a year. But my business lawyer is telling me that if I sign a similar one for my new marketing manager role, it's totally enforceable. How is the same document valid for one person and garbage for another depending on the job? Has anyone else run into this split between what the courts are actually doing and what lawyers say happens?

3 comments

3 Comments

patricialee20d ago

Does your lawyer also have a side gig selling bridges, or is that just a coincidence?

harpery4721d ago

Lawyers are gonna tell you what they think will hold up in court, not what's actually happening on the ground. I've seen this exact mess before where a non-compete got killed by a judge because the guy was making $80k doing pretty basic sales work. Your lawyer is probably banking on the fact that marketing managers usually clear the $100k threshold in Washington, but the real fight is if they try to restrict you from working in the whole field. The split you're seeing is because courts are getting way stricter about these things than lawyers want to admit, especially if the agreement is too broad or lasts too long. My advice is to push your lawyer to show you three recent cases where a similar non-compete actually stuck in your state, not just give you the standard "sure it's good" line. Ngl, I'd probably sign it but keep a copy of that labor board ruling handy just in case they try to pull a fast one later.

noahmartin21d ago

I mean is it really that deep though? "Keep a copy of that labor board ruling handy" sounds like you're bracing for some dramatic showdown but most companies just move on and never bother enforcing these things.