Biden and noncompete.

[WinoBlues]

I personally think the administration is on the right track on eliminating the current non competes and requirements to inform employees that there are no non competes.

 

[Newby]

Most IMOs will not release even if no debt i owed. The release requirement is effectively an 6 month non compete.

Effectively maybe. But that's not what it is. What Biden's doing won't affect it.

 

[Newby]

I personally think the administration is on the right track on eliminating the current non competes and requirements to inform employees that there are no non competes.

I understand what you mean BUT I think the government makes BS rules to get votes without thinking them through.

For instance. When I worked for a Honda Dealer if a dealer did the RIGHT thing and sent a young mechanic to the factory training courses and paid him for the weeks he's gone and paid Honda for the training and paid his hotel, etc. and gives him a nice raise since he's now Honda Certified mechanic that's all good right?

But some piker competitor that doesn't want that expense and time wasted can then just bid him up a little bit and offer him a sign on bonus and still be money ahead plus no down time at their dealership.

There is always two sides. It can cost businesses to not invest in their people that previously did.

 

[toolbelt]

I understand what you mean BUT I think the government makes BS rules to get votes without thinking them through.

For instance. When I worked for a Honda Dealer if a dealer did the RIGHT thing and sent a young mechanic to the factory training courses and paid him for the weeks he's gone and paid Honda for the training and paid his hotel, etc. and gives him a nice raise since he's now Honda Certified mechanic that's all good right?

But some piker competitor that doesn't want that expense and time wasted can then just bid him up a little bit and offer him a sign on bonus and still be money ahead plus no down time at their dealership.

There is always two sides. It can cost businesses to not invest in their people that previously did.

Typically, there are more employees than there are business owners, therefore rule changes such as this, benefit the majority. It also forces owners to pull up their socks and become more efficient. NCC's are anti-capitalism and freedom.

 

[whatyouwantfinally]

Typically, there are more employees than there are business owners, therefore rule changes such as this, benefit the majority. It also forces owners to pull up their socks and become more efficient. NCC's are anti-capitalism and freedom.

There is nothing more moral about helping 10,000 people than there is helping 1 person. More doesn't = more moral.

I do have issues with some aspects of non-competes, but certain protections are necessary. "Capitalism" can only function when property rights are respected, and "freedom" doesn't mean freedom to steal. Also, capitalism requires people to be able to sign contracts/make agreements and be held to them. Everyone is free not to sign anything they don't want to

Things like customer lists and trade secrets are valuable assets, and taking them is theft. Aspects of non-competes that go beyond that are, IMO, unjustified.

 

[goillini52]

And of course he got the name wrong. Her name is Arndrea Waters King.

 

[Newby]

Typically, there are more employees than there are business owners, therefore rule changes such as this, benefit the majority. It also forces owners to pull up their socks and become more efficient. NCC's are anti-capitalism and freedom.

It helps and it hurts.
Like in my example it will definitely cause businesses to be much less likely to "invest" in their employees. It will put more of the burden of self improvement on each individual.
I guess something like a contract that that the investment in the employee must be paid back if the employee leaves within a certain period of time might work. But good luck collecting on that.

 

[Cornelius]

I don't see how that would affect it at all. Insurance companies don't have anyone sign a noncompete. That has nothing to do with not allowing dual contracting or letting you bounce from one distribution channel to another.

The reason agents need releases is because insurance companies don't want agents bouncing around and trying to skip out on their debts. No non-compete clause needed. They simply require a 6-month wait or a release from the current (on the hook for the debts IMO).

Tru.

 

[scagnt83]

Here is the thing about employee investments... it cant be the only reason for staying.

So your going to build me up and make me better... but you arent going to pay me as much as the indy shop down the street will?

That is telling your employee that you do not value them as much as the indy shop does.

If they have the funds to give premier training... they have the funds to give premier pay and benefits. Problem solved.

Giving the training without commensurate pay is expecting someone to work below their worth... doesnt matter if you got them there or not... you are not recognizing what you built.

 

[WinoBlues]

But some piker competitor that doesn't want that expense and time wasted can then just bid him up a little bit and offer him a sign on bonus and still be money ahead plus no down time at their dealership.

Employer employee, salary and hourly relationships. I can see the differences today vs a couple of generations ago. Emloyer employee loyalty has disappeared. Employees need to look out for themselves. Even unionized workers.

In our business it is different as we are mostly independent. Of course there are differences between Captive, Semi Captive or Independent and Independent. No guaranteed income, paid only for what you produce daily, buy your own tools and leads, professional training, health benefits or pensions, or even Workers Comp.

I started as a Captive with mother mutual and had all of the above. And did not have a non complete other than the clients and list were theirs. No release needed. I think that is much more rare now.

There is always two sides. It can cost businesses to not invest in their people that previously did.

.

Agree completely. We typically hear only the pissed off agent side. The non releasing agencies don't seem to post in the open.

As far as investing in agents it would seem that is the draw to an agency and what keeps good agents with an agency like several of you guys here. What an agency pays or provides, I assume is different with each agency.

I myself have never been one to bounce around much. Releases have not been an issue. Also the traditional life side is different in that you can simply duel contract. Like an Independent agent.