The start of an employment relationship is, in some respects,
like the start of a romantic relationship. Seasoned executives
become giddy with the prospect of a new love, er, recruit.
"He/she is perfect! I want him/her to start tomorrow!"
they say to their employment lawyer. To which we say (among other
things): "Do you want the employment agreement to have a
"Weren't you listening? I said they are perfect! And
starting tomorrow! Why do we need that?"
In fact, you don't need a restrictive covenant for most
employees. In certain circumstances, however, you may be
particularly vulnerable. For instance, the employee may have or be
expected to develop special relationships of confidence and trust
with other key employees, customers or suppliers, making your
business vulnerable to the employee soliciting them after
termination of their employment. The employee may have, or develop,
special knowledge and relationships critical to your business, such
that the employee could easily compete after departure.
In these circumstances, you can negotiate restrictions on
soliciting other employees, customers or suppliers after
termination. Or you can negotiate the nuclear option, a blanket
prohibition against competition after termination.
Of course, if it is that easy, why not throw one of these nifty
clauses into every employment agreement? The reason is, the courts
are very reluctant to enforce restrictions on former employees'
ability to make a living, and other businesses from using their
skills. Courts will not enforce a restrictive covenant against a
departing employee unless you can show that the restraints imposed
are reasonable between the parties and in reference to the public
interest (for some relevant authority, see
In following posts, we will discuss the key factors and
practical realities of enforcement and suggest practical tips for
employers when negotiating such covenants.
Unfortunately, reasonable accommodation for employees in the workplace continues to be the source of significant litigation and even today we continue to see outrageous examples of employers behaving badly.
A former teacher at Bodwell High School has learned a valuable lesson from the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal— it is not discriminatory for an employer to offer child-related benefits to only employees with children.
We are now beginning to see reported cases involving charges and subsequent fines laid against employers for failing to provide information, instruction and supervision to protect a worker from workplace violence.
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).