Page 13 - TPM Newsletter JAN 2020
P. 13
January 2020 13
Continued From page 12
Penal es/Remedies
co-workers, or the public or would interfere with V Washington — Eff ec ve January 1, 2020, if a court
the employer’s reasonable, normal scheduling or arbitrator determines that a noncompe on
expecta ons. It also doesn’t alter their obliga ons covenant violates the noncompe on agreements
to the employer under exis ng laws, including the law, the violator must pay the aggrieved party actual
common-law duty of loyalty and laws preven ng damages or a statutory penalty of $5,000 (whichever
confl icts of interest, along with any corresponding amount is greater) plus reasonable a orneys’ fees,
policies addressing these obliga ons. Eff ec ve expenses, and costs incurred for the proceeding.
January 1, 2020, a franchisor can’t restrict, restrain, If a court or arbitrator reforms, rewrites, modifi es,
or prohibit a franchisee (as defi ned in Wash. Rev. or partly enforces a noncompe on covenant, the
Code § 19.100.010) from solici ng or hiring any party seeking enforcement of the covenant must pay
employee of the franchisor’s other franchisees or any the aggrieved party actual damages or a statutory
employee of the franchisor. Eff ec ve January 1, 2020, penalty of $5,000 (whichever amount is greater)
employers can’t enforce noncompe on covenants plus reasonable a orneys’ fees, expenses, and
against employees or independent contractors, costs incurred for the proceeding. Wash. Rev. Code
unless certain condi ons are met. Interac on § 49.NEW.NEW (2019 Wash. Sess. Laws 299 (H.B.
with other mandates: The noncompe on 1450), § 9).
agreements law displaces Washington’s confl ic ng V Idaho — Courts can limit or modify noncompe on
tort, res tu onary, contract, and other laws agreements or covenants to refl ect the par es’
regarding liability for compe on by employees or original intent and to make them reasonable in terms
independent contractors with their employer or of the circumstances under which they were made.
principal, as appropriate. The law doesn’t revoke, Courts also can specifi cally enforce these agreements
modify, or impede development of the common or covenants as limited or modifi ed.
law, except as provided in the law. Wash. Rev. Code
V Oregon — Employers that violate the
§ 49.NEW.NEW (2019 Wash. Sess. Laws 299 (H.B. noncompe on agreements law are guilty of a
1450), §§ 7 to 8, 10).
misdemeanor. Or. Rev. Stat. § 653.991.
V Idaho — Noncompe on agreements or covenants
V Montana — No data.
can’t impose a post-employment restric on on
direct compe on that exceeds 18 months, unless
key employees or independent contractors are
given considera on in addi on to employment or
con nued employment.
V Oregon — Employers can’t enforce noncompe on
agreements, unless certain condi ons are met. A IS COMBUSTIBLE & NUISANCE DUST
noncompe on agreement’s term can’t exceed causing you problems? Is se ling
18 months a er the employee’s termina on of dust on your ra ers, and upper
employment, and any part that exceeds 18 months is surfaces causing you safety
voidable and can’t be enforced by an Oregon court. concerns? WWW.SONICAIRE.COM
Or. Rev. Stat. § 653.295 (2019 Or. Laws 121 (H.B.
2992)). Dust collectors will never get 100% of your dust
created by your processes.
V Montana — Except under certain circumstances,
state law prohibits contracts or agreements that Let SonicAire help with these concerns, we
restrain trade or commerce. provide permanent solu ons to these issues so
Permissible Ac ons your employees never have to be put in danger to
Please contact Colt Catlin, TPM In-House Counsel to clean these areas again.
iden fy when and how a noncompe on agreement SonicAire Interview - Cabinet Mfg.
may be permissible in your state.
h ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8kstmzot-U&feature=youtu.be
SonicAire – See How it Works
h ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuqEy3SEEps&feature=youtu.be
503.510.7265
Timber Products Manufacturers Associa on
