Let's discuss this http://www.rediff.com/getahead/2007/jun/06msg.htm
---
The user's input has been corrected for spelling, grammar, and punctuation errors. Additionally, I have ensured proper paragraph formatting with a single line break between the text and maintained the original meaning and tone of the message.
From India, Nagpur
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
17---
The user's input has been corrected for spelling, grammar, and punctuation errors. Additionally, I have ensured proper paragraph formatting with a single line break between the text and maintained the original meaning and tone of the message.
From India, Nagpur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Manisha,
To make your post easier to read, the discussion topic is added here directly.
Chandrasekar
Infosys comes down hard on quitting employees - June 06, 2007
IT giant Infosys is having all its employees sign a non-compete clause which states that even after the employee quits the company, he/she cannot work for any of Infosys' competitors. In fact, the clause allegedly lists by name the top five rival companies - Tata Consultancy Services, Accenture, IBM Global Services, Cognizant, and Wipro.
It also disallows employees from taking up job offers presented to them by the organization's customers for up to six months after quitting, if the employee in question has worked on that particular customer's assignments in the previous one year.
Infosys has justified this clause, saying it is a common practice for companies to safeguard their interests and bind their employees to them. Although the legal standing of such a contract is disputed, many employees simply prefer to pay the penalty when breaching it, rather than face a powerful company's legal team in court.
We're asking you - do you think such a move on the part of large organizations is justified? Given that hundreds of employees join and leave annually, is it right for big companies to try and bind them by contract? Or is it grossly unfair that an employee has to pay a large sum when defecting to the employer's competitors?
What is your take on the subject? We want to know, so come share your opinions and experiences with us.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
To make your post easier to read, the discussion topic is added here directly.
Chandrasekar
Infosys comes down hard on quitting employees - June 06, 2007
IT giant Infosys is having all its employees sign a non-compete clause which states that even after the employee quits the company, he/she cannot work for any of Infosys' competitors. In fact, the clause allegedly lists by name the top five rival companies - Tata Consultancy Services, Accenture, IBM Global Services, Cognizant, and Wipro.
It also disallows employees from taking up job offers presented to them by the organization's customers for up to six months after quitting, if the employee in question has worked on that particular customer's assignments in the previous one year.
Infosys has justified this clause, saying it is a common practice for companies to safeguard their interests and bind their employees to them. Although the legal standing of such a contract is disputed, many employees simply prefer to pay the penalty when breaching it, rather than face a powerful company's legal team in court.
We're asking you - do you think such a move on the part of large organizations is justified? Given that hundreds of employees join and leave annually, is it right for big companies to try and bind them by contract? Or is it grossly unfair that an employee has to pay a large sum when defecting to the employer's competitors?
What is your take on the subject? We want to know, so come share your opinions and experiences with us.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Join Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.
Non-compete clause in service contracts.pdf
Non-compete Clause of Infy.jpg