I'd think it isn't about employee getting 30%. It is about the companies would be paying money really for nothing in most cases, and thus forcing the companies to avoid blanket enforcement (and unpredictable at that as it avoids the company having the free option of coming after you nilly-vanilla when they feel like it years later) - and such avoidment is great for innovation industry-wise. If your confidentiality agreement is really meaningful, then probably you can negotiate much better payment.
replyI believe this is the interpretation that most closely reflects the intent of the legislation. This is not a form of income, but rather a means of discouraging companies from acting recklessly.
replyBad if you leave for a competitor. I've never really done so. Fintech, social media, recipes, bidding, e-commerce, fashion, saas, mental health, games, and so on. There's just a wide range of fields you can go into that don't compete and still use the same skills.
replyUnless the previous employer is slow and incompetent, if you've done good work, they'd probably be ahead and better funded. I'd take the money.
Only if you're a generalist. What if you're an expert on some specific tech?
replyI mean I would probably take the money and temporarily switch fields too but I don't think it's quite that simple for a lot of people.
So do it four times and retire.
replyHmm… in four different industries, though… Yeah okay there might be some issues.