[ghaff]

Garden leave is a pretty imperfect mechanism. Given bonuses/RSUs and benefits, even 100% base salary could represent a 50% compensation cut plus the potential cost of taking a year break mid-career. Sure, some would be happy to sign up but a lot wouldn't really want to be in that position.

[olliej]

Oh I agree entirely, the compensation should match your opportunity in industry. Specifically if you can get an offer for total compensation X and your current employer chooses to say you can't work at that other company, your current employer gets to match X plus say a 20-30% premium to compensate for lost year of experience, lost year of promotions, etc and to try and say "do you really want to inflict this noncompete on people?". Note that you would not be employed by your current/former employer, they are paying you to not work for a competitor but if they require you to do work for them then they're just reseting the non-compete period.

My goal in limiting NCAs would be for employers: "you cannot use non competes to artificially lower employee compensation, as your total cost will be much very expensive"; and for individuals: "if you are subject to an NCA you will actually be compensated for that period".

It would also mean you can do industry standard practice of changing jobs to increase compensation even while subject to an NCA as they would be required to pay you more than the "competitor" if you get an offer and they want to prevent you taking it. Again the goal is to prevent the use of NCAs for wage suppression - the company requiring the NCA would have to be really dedicated to their belief the NCA is needed.

[aliceryhl]

The law in Denmark requires that you include all components of the compensation, not just base pay. This includes bonuses, pension, and things like the value of a company-provided car or phone.

Regarding RSUs, the document I'm reading does not explicitly mention them, but it says that it includes all benefits that you are taxed on, and well, I'm certainly being taxed on my RSUs.

All that said, the clause says you only get 40% or 60% of your full compensation (depending on the duration), so it is a ~50% pay cut for other reasons. Furthermore, it reduces to 16% if you manage to find another job in the same industry, and you are required to look for such jobs.

[madsbuch]

I am not entirely sure if you juxtapose the legal framework for Danish non-competes and garden leave. But assuming you do: In Denmark you are formally not employed, and you are free (actually obligated) to look for other job opportunities. You just can't, well, compete. So you can not take employment in a competitors company etc.

[ghaff]

So, if you're a lawyer, you just can't work as a lawyer. Or at least you need to work for a different type of company which may not be easy to do depending on your specialty. In fact, forcing someone to look for work doing something different seems like an even worse outcome than letting them do whatever personal activities they want for a year at reduced pay.

[madsbuch]

> you need to work for a different type of company

This is the correct interpretation.

There is a max time of 6 months for non-compete (and non-solicit). So in practice this is never an issue – you just wait out your 6 months.

[ghaff]

Except what normally happens for professional jobs in the US is that someone lines up a new job, then they quit (and maybe take a few weeks off between jobs). In general, in the US, not being able to start a new job for 6 months would be a non-starter in many situations. And, while some occupations may be very hot, depending upon your age/experience/etc. being able to just quit and count on quickly lining something up when you start looking seems risky.

[madsbuch]

I am not advocating this system at all, merely pointing out that in Denmark there are protections for employees and a requirement for the employer to pay.

[olliej]

So... you're free to change employer as long as you are willing to take a pay cut to work outside your field?

[madsbuch]

Yes, for a maximum of 6 months, which is the maximum time you can enforce a non-compete in Denmark.

[olliej]

Right, and so you should be compensated at the rate of the profession your former employer is preventing you from working.

I don't see why an employer gets to say "well actually if you want to change your job you have to take a massive pay cut for 6 months. oh that means you can't afford your mortgage? ... that must suck. Have you considered working here for your current compensation indefinitely? that way you can keep your house"

[madsbuch]

Yep, that sounds reasonable.

[tedajax]

OK so... I can't work in my chosen field now? Seems pretty stupid.

[madsbuch]

Yes, for a maximum of 6 months, which is the maximum time you can enforce a non-compete in Denmark.