[prirun]

> What is being banned are non-competes that don’t pay someone to not compete.

Employers will just say "the no-compete compensations is built in to your pay".

[lazide]

Which is what is banned in California. If someone wants an enforceable non-compete, they need to pay them (fairly and explicitly) for the time they’re not allowed to compete.

[lovich]

They can say anything, but the behavior has gotten enough voter anger to make politicians view this as something to regulate, so their opinion on the matter is quickly going to lose any weight

[PeterisP]

Sure, and in this case as soon as the pay stops, the non-compete obligations stop as well.