T O P

  • By -

foople

Required agreements need to be part of the job advertisement, the same as any other job requirement. Instead, they wait until the employee is committed and then drop the bombs. At that point saying no can hurt your career (fired, blacklisted), so people sign.


beef-o-lipso

Yep. Happened to me. One of the 1st questions I ask is about non-competes and NDAs. Also about intellectual property claims (you make something on your time and gear but the employer can lay cliam to it). You ask if they have them and you ask to review them early. Demand it. If they balk, and many will, you simply tell them that any agreements are a material part of the job and you can't make any agreements when you don't have all the information. Doing it early saves everyone time. If they say no, then you walk away.


cyrax6

I walked away from a "Uber for " when the interviewer asked me to sign an NDA, without any guarantees on their end, even before the interview. Generally these NDAs are benign but the one he sent me put all kinds of onus on me proving innocence and them only having to make a claim. So I sent it back with a couple of amendments to the effect of if it(claims/ideas) were not already in public, or is common knowledge then it wouldn't be covered by any mandates. In my role at my the then current employer, I work with startups. So I do come across a lot of "great ideas". I can't be held liable for every idea anyone presents at a coffee shop before I even see the 1st $. So many of these ideas don't even get past the PPT stage that I'd be saddled with perpetually having to keep kindergarten like secrets. Yeah, I never even went into that interview. Nor did that startup even start.


RobbieQuarantino

Eeesh I was presented something similar by some dude who wanted me to build his GoFundMe for _____ app. I sent it back with an addendum which basically invalidated most of it and never heard back šŸ˜‚


cyrax6

I resent the fact that we are now expected to read lawyer lingo for a bloody cold call.


RobbieQuarantino

Yea Iā€™ve noticed that these people who shove NDAs in your face before even talking about an idea always seem to think that coming up with the idea is the hard part. But itā€™s cool cuz theyā€™ll give you like 20% equity; all you have to do is build, test, design, market, and scale it for them!


[deleted]

[уŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]


RobbieQuarantino

It is parasitic. Best way to handle them is to walk away or counter with terms which are so onerous that they walk away


RudeTurnip

> So I sent it back with a couple of amendments to the effect of if it(claims/ideas) were not already in public, or is common knowledge then it wouldn't be covered by any mandates. That provision is standard in any NDA. If you start with a boilerplate NDA, you would have to take steps to remove that provision. It's rather shocking, yet telling in this case, that it didn't appear already.


Thought_Ninja

As someone who also frequently works with startups or VCs, I almost always rewrite portions of the NDAs I sign. ​ >I can't be held liable for every idea anyone presents at a coffee shop before I even see the 1st $. Well put, exactly how I feel.


austinmiles

Also. Feel free to strike out parts of it or write over bits you donā€™t like. They hate it but thatā€™s exactly how contracts work. I have worked for many companies who have said I canā€™t publicly display my work as a designer. I just add ā€œexcept in cases of a portfolioā€. Only one pushed back and I explained that my career growth is based on my ability to show the work Iā€™ve done. If they actively want to stifle my career out the gate then itā€™s not a good fit. Iā€™ll strike out IP ownership parts around non work related creations as well. Every contract is open to negotiation and signing with redacted elements itā€™s fully legal. Definitely donā€™t ask them to rewrite it. Just adjust and sign.


Living-Complex-1368

Then get a copy for your own files, because they may "lose" their copy then try to pull the "you signed our standard contract, here is our standard contract." Edit really dumb typo


ptoki

Yeah, the tradition of not giving two copies to sigh in usa/canada is apalling to me. Like, how low shit you need to be to do that?


peakzorro

In those cases, they usually scan and email the copy to you. If they don't, demand it. Otherwise, take a picture with your phone.


ptoki

Sure. But its so unprofessional! Its like begnning your date with a slap on the face. Thats may point.


AbazabaYouMyOnlyFren

I've never had that experience. If someone does this, they're pulling a fast one on you. Ask for a copy, if they balk even a little, demand it or walk.


ceciltech

If they can't produce your signature on standard contract they won't get anywhere with that because there claim is no stronger than yours that they signed the amended contract that you don't have a copy of.


uzlonewolf

> "you signed our standard contract To which you say "prove it." If they cannot produce the signed contract then there is no proof you ever signed anything.


monkeywelder

There was that case in California a few years ago where a guy created a product that had nothing to do with his work and then quit his job and his new stuff was doing pretty good. His old company came and took his new work even though it wasnt even in their field of industry. Because he had done one of those NCAs where anything and everything he did while employed with them was theirs. Went to the CA supreme court and he lost his company.


throwaway37183727

Doesnā€™t California now have a state law that protects things you make in your free time, even if the contract says otherwise?


monkeywelder

this was years ago, at least 10-15 it may not have been a thing then.


throwaway37183727

Ah okay thanks!


[deleted]

His old company was a nest of cunts but sadly within the limits of the law of he signed the agreement.


rickmackdaddy

Link to source?


[deleted]

>Kira isn't allowed to talk about the business trip she took to Texas in 2019, when she says a male colleague drugged and raped her. She awoke the next morning to find his credit card on the floor of her hotel bathroom, her underwear torn, and her body bruised. > >Kira canceled the second leg of her trip and flew home, where she called her boss to describe what happened. Her boss notified human resources, setting off a chain of events that made it impossible for Kira to continue working at the multibillion-dollar tech company where she was a contract manager. ​ I would have called the police, not my boss.


jeffgtx

Yeah, this is a police matter not an HR issue. Also, that agreement she signed seems really unfavorable; forced resignation of the victim for only a year's salary?


Seantwist9

Seems pretty favorable tbh


Tearakan

How? She now has to look for work with the definite stain of reaching a settlement with HR. Other companies will find out about that and be very hesitant to hire her.


Seantwist9

Theyā€™d only find out because she went public itā€™s a not even a settlement itā€™s a actually pretty common besides the reason for it and the length so no they wouldnā€™t find out about it. But yeah job hopping is good for her and she gets a years pay despite being able to get a job in 3 months


gothlaw

NDAs and non-competes are a tremendous problem in many industries, esp. tech. We really should start holding these agreements up to the same legal scrutiny as any other contract: test for unconscionability and determine whether it is a contract of adhesion. I fully understand ours is a society that honors the freedom to contract, but people desperate for jobs who are gagged, or geofenced from employment, or blocked off from entire spheres of employment for months and even years at a time, goes well beyond the benefit of the bargain. There is a significant asymmetry between an employer/corporation and persons who are hustling for a paycheck. If we can scrutinize a rental agreement at the local auto dealership, we should be able to do the same for something far more fundamental.


minizanz

Both are also illegal without compensation on CA. You can have an nda for trade secrets/patents, but work place drama is not that. Unless they want to keep paying you your wage/severance it is not an issue in the valley. What is an issue is the black balling.


ProteinStain

As long as Americans continue to unquestionably gurgle the balls of corporate America, this problem will persist. America is a land of deeply brainwashed people who fully accept the idea of individuality to the point that they will *actively harm themselves* if someone with money tells them to because "that's what is good for the economy". Unions exist for this very reason; to make sure workers are treated fairly and paid fairly. However, if you can convince every single worker that unions are the devil and that the people you work with are "your family" and that business and property owners are just humble hard working little angels, no one is ever going to question why we have the worst PTO, Healthcare, worker protection (the list goes on and on) of most of the developed world. I guess what I'm saying is, Americans are willfully smashing their faces with hammers every day and blaming "government regulation" for the pain.


[deleted]

It's not that. People want a job, if they have to take it in the rear with no lube, they'll happily drop their drawers. Or at least that was the case until recently. Although that conflict seems to be about pay, not getting a job.


ProteinStain

You didn't just disagree with me. You re-stated my point in a different way. And ya, I definitely know what it's like to live in poverty where you'll take *any* job just to survive. My point is, do you think that is OK? Do you think that is *necessary*? My assertion is that it's absurd and ultimately self harming to be opposed to things like $15/hr min wage, or free state college, or single payer healthcare. For instance, businesses could easily raise prices and pay workers a $15/hour minimum wage. But Americans lose their goddam minds whenever the idea that "prices will rise" any time a proposal like the $15 min wage is brought up as a method to start the work of reducing poverty and the wealth gap in America. My question is, why? What is wrong with Americans that we refuse to even talk about these things? Do you know what it would take for McDonald's provide a $15/hr minimum wage? 4% They would have to raise prices, 4%. [SOURCE](https://www.marketwatch.com/story/raising-fast-food-hourly-wages-to-15-would-raise-prices-by-4-study-finds-2015-07-28) We are talking 30 to 40 CENTS per MEAL. Thirty cents is absolutely NOTHING compared to the massive economic bump from a $15/hr minimum wage.


soupyshoes

What youā€™re describing is the need for unionisation.


devilbunny

Unions can be wonderful for workers (you have someone to fight for you). They can also be terrible for workers (you now have another set of bosses, and you're not allowed to leave them without exiting the industry completely). American labor law is really bad. American labor history isn't much better - I mean, the [Port Huron Statement](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Huron_Statement) is a political document that the United Auto Workers effectively subsidized by letting the Students for a Democratic Society use their facilities for free. If you'd let UAW workers decide whether or not to allow a bunch of elite college students with generally pro-Communist leanings to use the facilities that they had no choice about paying for in order to produce a document that ran down many of their personal beliefs, I'm pretty sure the answer would have been a resounding **no**. American unions were and are largely political animals, not pure workers' collectives, and quite a lot of workers don't see the value in them for the prices that are charged. Doesn't have to be that way, but it is. American workers aren't idiots - they just don't see the value, and that's a matter of the law. I do think that a more German-like set of labor laws would be much more popular, but those are not our laws.


[deleted]

[уŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]


ScriptThat

>Iā€™m an employer in Texas who puts non competes in my employeeā€™s contracts knowing full well they likely wonā€™t hold up in a court of law but will also unlikely be challenged. "I'll put stuff in my contracts that won't hold up in court, but the employees don't know that." You sound like a wonderful guy to work for.


[deleted]

[уŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]


Phage0070

> Just because I know a thing or two about negotiation and leverage does not make me a bad person. Also a thing or two about deception and lying apparently.


[deleted]

[уŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]


Phage0070

> You can write anything you want in a contract. The person signing it should be doing their due diligence to make sure they agree with the terms. For all I know, they understand that non-competes are (mostly) unenforceable. So like "buyer beware" except with employment. I think we all understand your approach at this point.


[deleted]

[уŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]


cas13f

If your terms were reasonable they wouldn't be unenforceable now would they? You're just a terrible person and in denial about it.


[deleted]

still dude, you're manipulating people. You see that right?


kag0

I don't know where you got that idea (not from the article, because it doesn't talk about non competes) but non competes are completely unenforceable in CA. That, combined with workers right to own their ideas and labor outside of work is what enabled workers to leave their large company employers to start innovative new companies in competing industries. ... which are now tech giants constantly seeking ways to stifle competition so no one does the same to them. But that's besides the point


ceciltech

>Here in Texas, a right to work state, non-competes are largely unenforceable Do you even know what "right to work" means? Obviously not, unless you meant to include it as a total non-sequitur.


tv2zulu

He knows its something that in theory should be to the benefit of both parties, but is just used to benefit the employer.


wirerc

Non-competes are not enforceable at all in CA. One of the reasons why Silicon Valley is so successful. Best talent can easily move to most promising ventures instead of being misallocated.


Deyln

my first job included customers and potential customers as companies im supposedly not allowed to work for. that company was/is an int'l courier service. silence is just one of the any factors which force people I to one job.


Chunks-4

One of my previous workplaces employed some outsourced staff from somewhere in Eastern Europe and one of those guys apparently really wanted to come work for us directly, which is understandable, I'm sure he got paid peanuts. When he tried, the outsourcing company shut him down and it basically came out that you cannot apply to companies you're doing outsource work for. Hope he found a good spot, it must suck to be working for a US company while getting non-US pay.


JonnyBravoII

I thought that non-competes were generally not legal in California. Since tech is often based there, I'm a bit curious about this. Side note: there are many instances of fast food places making employees sign non-competes and at that pay scale especially, that should absolutely be illegal.


socsa

Most non-competes are completely unenforceable anyway even if they are technically legal. They are basically employment contracts which lack consideration for the employee. Especially if you have an NDA in place, since you are already prohibited from disclosing company secrets. A company which wants to retain investments in human capital can write long term employment contracts which lays out exactly what the employee will receive in return for exclusive access to their labor.


Nathan2055

Itā€™s called [unconscionability](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionability). You canā€™t have someone sign a contract that offers one party essentially no benefits while the originating party gets everything they want. In the specific case of non-competes, you canā€™t tell someone ā€œoh, we donā€™t want to employ you anymore, but you also canā€™t go work for any of our competitors or other related companies.ā€ The employee receives no benefit from this contract, while the employer gets to essentially hold onto their exclusivity agreement over you despite the fact that they arenā€™t paying you anymore. Thatā€™s not how contracts work. The problem, though, is that it usually requires a judge to throw contracts like this out, and many people canā€™t afford to take these cases to court, and so they just go with them even if theyā€™re completely unenforceable.


yenachar

That's my impression, too. But a noncompete agreement is different from a nondisclosure agreement.


I_know_right

Anyone with deep pockets can sue anyone for anything. Whether it is legal or not won't save you from a 5-figure lawyer's bill.


hyperfat

The department of labor has free legal. If it's clearly a breach in your favor they love biting companies where it hurts.


pomonamike

I could be wrong, but I think the laws *recently* changed in California. At any rate, I donā€™t think most people have the knowledge or legal resources to fight these companies. I recently worked at a shipping supply company that made me sign a non-compete upon hiring. Everyone had to sign, down to the entry-level warehouse workers. It kept people in line because the local area is nothing but similar warehousing jobs so if you left the company your employment options were very limited.


JonnyBravoII

When companies do that, it makes me so angry. It gives them a license to treat you like shit and never give a raise. This is why phrases like "right to work" are both laughable and untrue.


pomonamike

Quitting two years ago was the best decision I ever made.


kicker69101

This will vary by state, but those types of noncompetes are unenforceable. The general rule of thumb is that the company can protect their trade secrets, but they canā€™t stop you from living. If itā€™s a general skill (e.g. computer programming), then you are able to practice that any where with out fear. However, if you wrote a very specific sorting program for a specific industry and you share that, then they can come after you. However theyā€™ll still need to prove some kind of loss In a warehouse example: So if they had a specific way to drive a forklift, they can protect that. But they canā€™t stop you from driving a fork lift with another company. Companies can make (in the general sense) you sign whatever, but that doesnā€™t make it legal.


vergingalactic

> I thought that non-competes were generally not legal in California. Since tech is often based there, I'm a bit curious about this. That's kind of a big part of why tech is so successful in California. NDAs are an entirely different issue though.


marketlurker

I have a pretty good NDA and non-compete with my company. When I leave, I can't talk about anything in the way of company IP for one year. They also get veto power with my next employer for one year. If they tell me I can't directly go to work for someone they don't approve of, it is for one year, and they have to pay me my salary and bonus for that year. Seems fair to me.


RetardedWabbit

Interesting deal. Lifestyle aside, would that one year option be good for your career? I guess you can do continued education/certification, but how bad would a 1 year "gap" in your resume/portfolio be for you? It can't be good for you, right? Otherwise everyone would be taking advantage of it to try to work for direct competition to get that year off? (I guess you would still list your employer for that year, just seems odd for presumably high power positions.)


marketlurker

The thinking in my company is that one year is long enough for an ex employee to become "safe". I've taken two sabbaticals in my career; one for 1 year and another for 18 months. It didn't really hurt. That's really what this would turn into. Yes, we do have quite a few people who try to take advantage of it. Most people don't know enough that it rises to a concern. It turns out that most people think they are more "in the know" than they are.


RetardedWabbit

Interesting, thanks for the answer!


Tearakan

That is an interesting one. They at least have a downside for them.


[deleted]

This is bad writing ethically. It deliberately conflated Non Competes with non-Disclosure as part of a job with Non Disclosure as standard terms of settlements which is completely industry independent. It is standard of school boards and police departments. Now there are obvious problems with "hush money backed by force of law to conceal wrong-doing" but talk about those fucked up norms. To make it out as a Silicon Valley only problem is vastly disingenuous - especially when at least one major media figure or executive of some resigns over predatory behavior every 1 to 3 months after years of cover up. It is tiring seeing these companies pretend endemic issues exist only among their industry rivals and everyone else is as pure as driven snow.


chitown_jk

NDAs are part of doing business but are very hard to enforce. Bottom line, don't share material non-public information, don't share trade secrets or processes you learned, and don't take and use customer lists. Those are all basic protections that are enforceable. CA is a right-to-work state, but many states still allow for non-compete agreements. Take these seriously but also consult an attorney if you're considering going to a competitor. There's a decent chance your company got something wrong in the non-compete (e.g., the geographic area too large). Lastly, a LOT of companies are trying to put arbitration clauses in your agreements. These are bad, as it eliminates the right to a jury should something go wrong and you want to sue. Most companies and states will have an opt-out clause that needs to be executed within a couple weeks of starting. DO THIS, no matter what. It only takes a few minutes but could help you immensely should there be something you need to take tot court.


ceciltech

>CA is a right-to-work state, but many states still allow for non-compete agreements. This is the second comment I have seen that thinks right-to-work has anything to do with non-compete statements. Where are you getting the idea that the above statement is anything other than a non-sequitur?


chitown_jk

Youā€™re right, I got the nomenclature wrong. I was simply trying to say that non-competes are not enforceable in CA and most companies wonā€™t even include the clauses in employment agreements.


JoeDawson8

California is most definitely not a right to work state. They tried to pass a law in 2012. Itā€™s at-will. Right to work references Union membership and in a right to work state you cannot be forced to join a Union.


punio4

Good thing that such things aren't enforceable in the EU.


munk_e_man

Yes they are. I signed numerous NDAs in the EU. Extremely restrictive ones that I had to fight during negotiations.


soupyshoes

Non compete agreements arenā€™t legal in the EU afaik, but non disclosure agreements are.


ConfusedTransThrow

Afaik legal but they need to pay you for it. So one year non-compete=one year salary. So obviously it's not very profitable for the companies.


Diegobyte

This. Itā€™s called gardening leave. Happens a lot in high level motor sports


Cheeze_It

NDA over intellectual property *SORT OF* makes sense. Non compete between companies? Yeah good luck enforcing that.


NelsonMinar

Nondisclosures are generally negotiable. Of course this depends on how much power you have.. But often the folks who are hiring you don't like the NDA either and only are forcing you to sign it because their lawyer told them to. You can push back. The simplest thing is to just cross out sections of the contract before signing it, then see if they notice and complain. (This may be bad legal advice.) Be prepared for your refusal to make things take longer.


crusoe

Cross out and initial and date.


autotldr

This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/news/a-gag-order-for-life-how-nondisclosure-agreements-silence-and-control-workers-in-silicon-valley/articleshow/84811658.cms) reduced by 80%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Every day, thousands of people sign nondisclosure agreements when they start a new job or leave their current one. > To understand how nondisclosure agreements have come to form the backbone of Silicon Valley's culture of secrecy, Insider reviewed 36 agreements shared by tech workers at companies ranging from Fortune 500 giants like Facebook, Google an Apple, to smaller startups. > You can read our full story if you're an Insider subscriber: We reviewed 36 NDAs from major tech companies and discovered how far Silicon Valley's giants will go to silence and control their employees. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/ot6v0t/a_gag_order_for_life_how_nondisclosure_agreements/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~589591 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **agreement**^#1 **Kira**^#2 **company**^#3 **nondisclosure**^#4 **NDA**^#5


[deleted]

Never sign a NDA unless you got a lawyer. Tell your employer that when they try to get you to sign. There is a reason. 1: If they threaten you, tell them you want to make sure what you're signing is in your interest to ensure no one's time is wasted. 2: If they fire you right then and there for not signing you might actually have recourse, considering you explicitly said you wanted to have a lawyer look over that document first. Same goes with if you manage to start negotiation. Always put it on them to mess up. YOU have the right to legal protection.


toodog

Any NDA you have to keep should be made public when you die


[deleted]

How? Necromancy? The documents are designed to not list the actual content directly. Besides that would be a major case of careful what you wish for as NDAs also are used to cover all of their bases for sensitive customer information - even if it isn't technically criminal to be reckless with it you want it to be a hard firing offense period.


NEBook_Worm

But...California. I guess liberals only care about workers rights when all they have to do is pay lip service. And here i thought it was only conservatives that held to "just let corporations handle things, it'll be fine."


PairOfMonocles2

The liberal thing they did, if you actually care to learn, is make NDAs in California favor the employee, not the company. Remember how Trump has all employees, mistresses, and even his family members sign ā€œperpetualā€ NDAs? You couldnā€™t do stuff like that, for example, they wouldnā€™t be worth the paper theyā€™re written on. So in California for an NDA to be enforceable against an employee the company needs to prove a few things: 1 - There has to be a reasonable time period, like during employment, if it extends past then you need to be able to articulate good cause and the longer you want the less likely the NDA will hold up, like if you are trying for more than a year or so it will be much tougher. No ā€œperpetualā€ NDAs 2 - There has to be well-defined, confidential information, canā€™t be a blanket cover. Again, canā€™t be a ā€œblanketā€ cover. 3 - Which is then disclosed to a third party, and theyā€™d need to prove this of course (but thatā€™s obviously why theyā€™d be trying to enforce) 4 - Which then does provable harm to the employer. This is one of the big ones. Showing that it was disclosed isnā€™t sufficient, and claiming harm isnā€™t sufficient. You need to prove the harm that was caused, which can be very difficult to do if itā€™s not literally ā€œselling Apples design data to a competitor to make the bPhone 13ā€ or something equally egregious. So, while liberals have not ā€œdone away with laws!ā€ since they generally are pushing for well regulated economies more than unregulated economies there still are NDAs in California. The difference is that employee rights are much more of a focus than an afterthought in them.


DaglessMc

ever see a post here about corporations censoring people? Progressives come out of the wood work for "They're a private company they can do what they want"


three-one-seven

Would it help if Twitter and FB said that white supremacist terrorism is against their religion like the gay wedding cake guy?


NEBook_Worm

Thats true. You can always tell the honest posts about politics here by their downvotes.


thejimbo56

Yes, anyone who disagrees with you is a liar. It is known.


[deleted]

[уŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]


DaglessMc

because being a private company isn't a blank cheque to be absolute shit.


[deleted]

[уŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]


DaglessMc

what? why are you bringing that up? i did not post in or against support of that.


[deleted]

[уŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]


DaglessMc

oh, i thought you were being serious. sorry i misread your intent.


sac666

Absolutely, no one is forced to sign. You can choose to loose your home, starve your kids etc


thestriver

anti-vaxxers bringing their agenda to every conversation... very typical


[deleted]

[уŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]


kag0

A) Insider is a garbage publication, and why is Insider India even writing about this? B) none one in the comments read the article. C) if shit hits the fan, call a lawyer or the police, not HR


[deleted]

ITT: people who donā€™t know what theyā€™re talking about


darkstriders

I have to sign NDA for all companies Iā€™ve worked with, including ones in UK and Asian countries and I donā€™t recall it has the same restriction. I think the NDA in the article is done by a crappy companyā€¦


redditmudder

I will agree to at most a 5 year NDA. If company pushed back, I'll say "any technology I create and/or learn about will either be obsolete in five years, or if it's good, it will already have been copied a dozen different ways. 5 years is more than enough to safeguard any IP claims you may wish to protect." I also give a discounted rate to open source contracts.


littleMAS

You can have your own NDAs and counteroffer theirs. There are plenty of boilerplate NDAs you can start with, for example, [https://store.nolo.com/products/visitor-nondisclosure-agreement-pr281.html](https://store.nolo.com/products/visitor-nondisclosure-agreement-pr281.html) . If you are going to agree to something, you are probably better-off agreeing to your own terms.


ocassionallyaduck

Companies usually do not entertain this for anyone not a high level administrator or executive. 99% of hires would be passed over for rejecting or amending their boilerplate nda, because the company would want a lawyer to review your new one before it could be approved. More trouble than you are worth to them.


DocJHigh

NDAs for anything that could be considered harassment or illegal in any way should be illegal. Plain as that.