Texas Employment Contracts Legal Questions

Whether an non-compete is enforceable can't really be determined without looking at the document and having a complete understanding of the facts of the prior employment (trade secrets and the like). But whether or not the non-compete agreement is valid or invalid, your prospective employer has good reason to be nervous about hiring you in the face of that agreement.  Without knowing more, three immediate options present themselves: 1) go to work for the prospective employer, if he will hire you, and see what happens (often the former employer won't care, particularly if you really don't have any trade secrets you could pass on to the new employer - but if you are wrong, both you and the new employer may get sued by the old employer); 2) go ask your former employer for a letter releasing you from the non-compete completely or at least saying that it is OK if you go to work for a specific  new employer; 3) find a lawyer who is familiar with non-competes who will write a letter to the former employer telling them why the non-compete is no good and demanding a release and/or threatening a lawsuit to have a court declare the non-compete is no good. Good luck... Read Answer

It is hard to provide much useful information without reading the document and knowing the facts of your hiring, the confidential information or other trade secrets to which you were exposed, and the reasonableness of the non-compete restrictions.  In general, a non-compete agreement must be in writing in an otherwise enforceable agreement, the consideration given to the employee must give rise to the need for a non-compete, and the restrictions on competition must be reasonably necessary to protect the employer's trade secrets or good will.  To illustrate by way of some examples: If you work for Coca-Cola and you are one of the 6 people in the world with access to the secret formula for their product, it would probably be reasonable to prevent you from working in the soft drink industry anywhere in the world for the rest of your life.  If you work for a local pest control company and have access to their client information and pricing lists, it would be unreasonable for that pest control company to keep you from working in that business in some other part of the state where they do not operate and it might even be unreasonable for them to keep you from working in the same locality as long as you don't call on their customers. If you worked for a company that really has no secrets it ever shared with you and/or brags about all their clients on their website, then the entire non-compete agreement may be unenforceable. So you see your inquiry requires a careful analysis of the agreement itself and the facts surrounding your employment.  I recommend you retain a board certified labor and employment attorney in your area to advise you about your employer's rights, if any, to restrict your post-employment activities.  Good luck.... Read Answer

Your question presents a number of issues.  First,you are correct - if you are salaried, in general your pay cannot depend on the number of hours worked.  It is unusual, but not impermissible, for a salaried employee to receive overtime pay.  The better question is are they really treating you as an hourly employee (shorting your pay for hours not worked) but claiming that you are exempt from having to be paid overtime when you work more than 40 hours in a week.  If this is the case, find a qualified labor attorney right now. Second, an employer may request an employee repay amounts paid in error.  If the employee says "no" he may or may not have to pay it back (see below) but most likely he will be fired. Third, an employer may not deduct any amounts from an employee's paycheck (including past overpayments, but not including taxes and child support) unless the employee has given written authorization for the deduction.  Even then, the deduction may not reduce the employee's wages to an amount below minimum wage.  Many employers require employees to sign such authorizations at the beginning of their employment, particularly for things such as lost tools and uniforms.  However the authorization must be specific enough to cover the claimed deduction.... Read Answer

Many companies adhere to the policy of not saying anything about a former employee other than start and termination dates, but that is a matter of choice.  Adhering to that policy protects former employers from lawsuits from both former employees and those who hire them.  It's probably the smartest way to handle such a situation.  However, that doesn't mean that there is anything illegal about giving more information, if they are willing to take the risks.  The risks are that, if the information is false, the former employer could be sued for defamation (in a situation like yours, where a former employer bad mouths the former employee and costs the former employee a job or other damages) or for fraud (if it falsely praises the former employee and the new employer relies on that recommendation to hire someone incompetent or dishonest).   Thus, you may be able to sue your former employer for defamation, but you should be aware that defamation can only be faced on a false statement of fact; true statements are not defamatory, and neither are statements of opinion.... Read Answer

It is legal and possible to enter into an agreement with an employee under the terms of which the employee agrees not to make certain kinds of statements, or agrees to refrain from using certain media, both before and after employment. To the extent that the agreement relates to the period following employment, there would likely need to be some form of consideration (i.e., a cash payment from you) to support the promise by the employee. You would likely have enforceability problems if you entered into the agreement at a time when you held a secret and undisclosed intention to terminate the employee's employment. An attorney can assist you in this matter.... Read Answer

If your former boss told anyone else (even another employer) that you were fired for drug use when in fact that is not true, he/she committed the tort of slander and both he and his employer may be liable to you for damages in a civil suit.  In most jurisdictions, there are some types of slander for which you can recover even if you cannot show actual monetary damage, and others in which you can only recover for actual money damages you suffered - for example, if you can prove that you did not get a job because of the lie your former boss told.    I believe this case involves the first type, slander per se, which would be a much easier case to prove, however, if you did not suffer any actual money damages, it may be very difficult to get a jury to award you any substantial sum.  You should also be aware that there are many factors which could change this situation.  For example, slander (oral defamation) and libel (defamation in writing) only apply to statements of fact, not opinion; if your former boss told your stepfather that he THOUGHT you were doing drugs, this would not be slander, as it would only be his opinion.  There are also situations where statements which can be privileged, although it does not appear from the facts in your question that any privilege would apply here.  In short, it's a complicated situation.... Read Answer

You probably don't have a choice.  Federal courts do not have jurisdiction over most claims.  A federal court can only hear cases which either involve a federal question - such as claims arising under a federal statute (like ERISA, or the Voting Rights Act) or involve adverse parties from different states and a sufficiently large amount of money.  For example, if you and your employer are citizens of different states and your claim is for $75,000 or more, a federal court would have jurisdiction over your case against your employer.  There are some other technicalities as well, but those are the basics.  Your question doesn't divulge any basis for federal jurisdiction, but if there is such a basis, you would then have a choice over whether to sue in federal of state court (although there are a few types of cases which cannot be brought in state court and must be brought in federal court, yours does not appear to be one of them).  Attorneys generally make such decisions based on tactical reasons, such as which Court generally moves faster, where the physical courthouse is located, their familiarity with the judges and procedures in each venue, which court has a more effective or a cheaper mediation or arbitration program, etc.  You may also wish to assert claims with the local better business bureau, department of labor, and any other administrative agency which might get involved in such employment issues.... Read Answer

As a general matter, when an employer provides the tools, and specifies the place and manner of rendition of the employee's services, the employee cannot be classified as an independent contractor. Accordingly, payroll taxes should be paid. Of course, those taxes are imposed principally on you (and deducted from your wages).... Read Answer

Under the Texas Payday Act, an employer is required to pay a departing employee unused vacation and sick leave (or paid time off - PTO) only if it has a written policy that it will do so and then only under such terms and conditions as that policy provides.  If your employer has such a written policy, then the Texas Workforce Commission - Labor Law Department (800-332-9243), which enforces the Payday Act will accept your complaint and collect the unused time off pay. Best of luck... Read Answer

Please visit: http://www.texasbar.com/Content/NavigationMenu/ForThePublic/CantAffordaLawyer/ReferralDirectory.pdf This is not intended to be legal advice, and is general in its nature. No attorney-client relationship exists or is formed by this information. Furthermore, this does not represent the views or opinions of LexisNexis or its affiliated companies.... Read Answer

The very nature of at-will employment is that the employer is free to terminate any employee at any time for any reason or no reason at all. You have no more duty to retain him for the next two weeks than you would have if he had not given notice. Your questions about workers comp do not really make any sense. All employees are covered by workers comp, whether they are at-will employees or have contracts with a longer "duration" term. If he is injured on the job prior to termination, termination does not cut off his right to collect comp for injuries suffered while employed.... Read Answer

In the U.S., an employer need not have justification for termination -- employment is "at will," which means that employment may be terminated at any time for any reason or no reason at all. Thus, the employer must not have a "good," valid, logically consistent, credible or serious reason for termination.... Read Answer