Restrictions on what job you can do HR lawyers help?

[Greensleevevssnotnose]

I was put on a month's garden leave in November, so have been out of work for about a week. I was offered another job very similar was due to start today. I have a restriction in my previous contract that says I can't do my profession in any geographical area that my previous company operates in. As I work remotely and can have clients anywhere in the country ( financial sales role) this basically means I can't work for a year in the industry I am qualified in. I am now stuck waiting for a decision as to whether they will risk employing me. I'm pretty sure this is too restrictive but the rules are from pre COVID where sales were done face to face and were therefore more geographical. Is there a way I can get around this?

Contact your previous employer, explain the situation, and request their agreement in writing?

Do it anyway, as restrictive covenants are difficult for employers to enforce?

In any case, no restrictive covenant should prevent you from earning a living.

As long as you don’t go poaching lrevioua customers, ignore the clause it’s almost unenforceable.

We had a similar issue when my husband was going to leave his employer a few years ago and we got a employment lawyers advice . The restrictions are really hard to enforce but also can be enforced which is so tricky.

They told us at the time that if it ever went to court and you can prove that the clauses would stop you earning a living then it would usually fall apart at that point . The clauses can't restrict that much they have to be fair. My husband went into a different role so our conversations we not needed after that . In your case I feel Like not allowing you to work with any client in the country isn't fair bit maybe worth seeking advice from someone qualified if your able

It will depend on the wording and the circumstances, but generally speaking that sort of blanket geographical restrictive covenant is very difficult for a former employer to enforce. To show that a restriction is enforceable (and not an unenforceable restraint of trade) the wording needs to go no further than is necessary to protect the former employer's legitimate business interests.

It is often difficult for those employers to show that the only way to protect those business interests is by using a very broad non-compete clause when more specific clauses about not soliciting or dealing with your former employer's clients for a specified period (or similar clauses restricting dealings with suppliers/introducers or preventing you from poaching employees) are likely to give the protection they require. It would be worth getting an employment lawyer to review the clauses in your contract and formally advise you. Ideally your prospective new employer would be willing to do this to give themselves comfort on the situation (and pay the bill!) This advice shouldn't take more than about an hour's time for an employment lawyer so may be money well spent.

Thank you, I am happy with the non solicitation that's absolutely fair. I am in a union and they said to ignore it as it is too restrictive. They said if it was say a hairdresser you might not be able to work in three mile radius of the salon. But this says " any territory that the employer works in " and that could be anywhere in the UK. The new employer is getting his own advice but I am worried that he will come back and say it's too risky. I was upfront about is as I didn't think it would be a problem should have kept schtum and dealt with it if a problem arose.