• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Need Advice -- Sticky Career Situation

First let me say that I'm not looking for sympathy -- although I'm more than happy to get some if there is anyone who feels like giving.

What I'm looking for is advice. In a perfect world, I might be talking to an attorney, but I can't afford one -- and honestly, I doubt that any but the very best attorneys in the country could give me the perspective that some of the people here could.

So here goes.

I was recently relieved of my duties at an independently-owned radio station.

My contract included a 1-year non-compete. Things were good early on...I even got a promotion not long after getting here. With as much objectivity as is possible, the non-compete is overly restrictive in time and in scope. The agreement included a small severance which is already gone. While employed for this station, I already was living without cable and internet. The power gets shut off on Friday, and I have no idea how I will pay rent January 1. I am stuck in a 1-year lease after relocating here, a day's drive from my nearest family and/or friends. My unemployment claim has been pending for two weeks now, and I have no idea how long it will pend -- much less whether or not I will be approved for benefits.

I mention the promotion because I now find that I sit on much more information than I would have had access to under my original contract/job title. When I was fired, I was told I would need to sign something to receive my severance. I was actually glad about this, because from a legal standpoint, my contract already covered the terms under which I would receive severance; being asked to sign something else might have given me a chance to point that out and possible negotiate for a fairer settlement. They changed their minds and decided to give me my last check "no strings".

I now find myself in the situation of sitting on information that could potentially be damaging to the station's owner -- possibly illegal and/or tortuous offenses, definitely immoral. Without having consulted an attorney, I do believe that much of this information could be released without violating my confidentiality clause(s).

I also find myself in possession of information, gained since my employment ended, that -- if shared with my former employer -- could be very beneficial to them and potentially allow them to recover tens of thousands of dollars.

I left on good terms (as good as could be expected) with everyone except my immediate supervisor. I am trying to balance my desire for "revenge" with:

  • an attempt to try to make a move that could help save me from financial ruin/eviction/etc,
  • a desire to keep my reputation intact,
  • and a desire to do the "right" thing.

This will likely end up having been my last radio gig. It's no secret that our industry is in peril, and it's only going to get worse if people keep treating people this way. That, however, is another topic for another day.

So...my question(s): What would you do if you were me? I'm too poor to stay, too poor to leave. I understand the difficulty and expense of trying to seek legal redress for wrongful termination, discrimination, reduction of my non-compete, etc. Most of all, I feel that I was treated unfairly -- and with the situation I find myself in, I've had a lot of time to think about some of the other people that I'm aware are being treated unfairly (not to mention immorally/illegally/tortuously). What is my moral responsibility to these people? If you were the "station across town", would you be interested in speaking with me? What are some of the consequences (for me and for a potential new employer) of choosing not to honor my non-compete? Do I have anything to lose, really?

Feel free to address any or all of the thoughts I have shared here in the forum, or via private message. I've already said too much (in more ways than one,) but in closing, assume in your response that I am dealing with someone who has an extremely litigious streak. :-\

Happy Holidays.....
 
I've always assumed that if they fire you, the non-compete is void.
Once a manager asked that I bring a signed, voided non-compete, and I got it from the previous employer.
You've got nothing to lose from talking with your previous employers, but proceed with caution. Offer your benefit, don't threaten your damage. They get funny when they get defensive.
But it sounds like you're in a tight spot. Good luck with that.
s
 
You don't say what state you are in, but Tennessee, where I live, is a right to work state. They don't actually need a reason to fire you. Likewise, you are free to leave your job at any time.

In my situation (and you can read about it in my own thread under this topic), I was dismissed from my last station based on a lie. But again, Tennessee is a right to work state. I was allowed to resign to save my reputation so I did that.

Before I moved to Nashville, I worked for a station in west Tennessee in which the manager was an absolute ogre! It is my understanding that he damaged one former employee's self-esteem so much that the guy needed mental help and apparently nearly had a nervous breakdown. I didn't know the guy; he left before I came to work there. But I obviously knew the manager there, so I believe it to be true. He browbeat me constantly for a year, meanwhile forcing me to work 10-15 hours a week more than he was willing to pay me for, while still complaining about things not getting done. Nearly the entire staff turned over in the slightly over a year I was there. I tried to negotiate better working conditions for myself, but given the fact that if I was the least bit unhappy, he could have easily replaced me. So I really didn't have any bargaining chips to improve my situation there, and really had no choice but to walk away from the situation. I did, and have never looked back!
 
RadioHed said:
First let me say that I'm not looking for sympathy -- although I'm more than happy to get some if there is anyone who feels like giving.

What I'm looking for is advice. In a perfect world, I might be talking to an attorney, but I can't afford one -- and honestly, I doubt that any but the very best attorneys in the country could give me the perspective that some of the people here could.

So here goes.

I was recently relieved of my duties at an independently-owned radio station.

My contract included a 1-year non-compete. Things were good early on...I even got a promotion not long after getting here. With as much objectivity as is possible, the non-compete is overly restrictive in time and in scope. The agreement included a small severance which is already gone. While employed for this station, I already was living without cable and internet. The power gets shut off on Friday, and I have no idea how I will pay rent January 1. I am stuck in a 1-year lease after relocating here, a day's drive from my nearest family and/or friends. My unemployment claim has been pending for two weeks now, and I have no idea how long it will pend -- much less whether or not I will be approved for benefits.

I mention the promotion because I now find that I sit on much more information than I would have had access to under my original contract/job title. When I was fired, I was told I would need to sign something to receive my severance. I was actually glad about this, because from a legal standpoint, my contract already covered the terms under which I would receive severance; being asked to sign something else might have given me a chance to point that out and possible negotiate for a fairer settlement. They changed their minds and decided to give me my last check "no strings".

I now find myself in the situation of sitting on information that could potentially be damaging to the station's owner -- possibly illegal and/or tortuous offenses, definitely immoral. Without having consulted an attorney, I do believe that much of this information could be released without violating my confidentiality clause(s).

I also find myself in possession of information, gained since my employment ended, that -- if shared with my former employer -- could be very beneficial to them and potentially allow them to recover tens of thousands of dollars.

I left on good terms (as good as could be expected) with everyone except my immediate supervisor. I am trying to balance my desire for "revenge" with:

  • an attempt to try to make a move that could help save me from financial ruin/eviction/etc,
  • a desire to keep my reputation intact,
  • and a desire to do the "right" thing.

This will likely end up having been my last radio gig. It's no secret that our industry is in peril, and it's only going to get worse if people keep treating people this way. That, however, is another topic for another day.

So...my question(s): What would you do if you were me? I'm too poor to stay, too poor to leave. I understand the difficulty and expense of trying to seek legal redress for wrongful termination, discrimination, reduction of my non-compete, etc. Most of all, I feel that I was treated unfairly -- and with the situation I find myself in, I've had a lot of time to think about some of the other people that I'm aware are being treated unfairly (not to mention immorally/illegally/tortuously). What is my moral responsibility to these people? If you were the "station across town", would you be interested in speaking with me? What are some of the consequences (for me and for a potential new employer) of choosing not to honor my non-compete? Do I have anything to lose, really?

Feel free to address any or all of the thoughts I have shared here in the forum, or via private message. I've already said too much (in more ways than one,) but in closing, assume in your response that I am dealing with someone who has an extremely litigious streak. :-\

Happy Holidays.....

Sure, I'd be interested in speaking with you. There's always the chance that I might learn something.

But, unless you are an extraordinary talent (and I'm assuming that you're an air talent and not a salesperson) and/or that you are much beloved throughout the advertising market--and, therefore, represent a big financial upside for me and my company, I wouldn't join your legal battle against your former employer nor attempt to skirt the non-compete and hire your ass.

Life is too short. You are trouble--at least, too much trouble.

In most instances non-competes are enforceable. Like getting married or buying a house, don't sign up for it if you're not prepared to live with it.

My real-life advice, if you're hell-bent on staying where you are: get yourself a gig at the fast-food joint of your choice and another gig at the convenience store of your choice and keep your bills paid that way until your non-compete is finished. And in the meantime, keep the lines of communication open with the other broadcasters in town.
 
firepoint525 said:
You don't say what state you are in, but Tennessee, where I live, is a right to work state. They don't actually need a reason to fire you. Likewise, you are free to leave your job at any time.

One of my new missions in life is to educate people based on what I've gone through. The whole "right to work state" thing is WIDELY misused and misunderstood. It certainly gives employers wider berth in letting someone go...but it doesn't make them exempt from following federal and state unemployment laws AS WELL AS their own company's stated policies (in a contract, employee manual, etc.)

In the real world, it doesn't matter much because one must have resources to pursue these things...but...this misinformation is part of what perpetuates employers feeling free to treat people however they want.
 
RadioHed said:
One of my new missions in life is to educate people based on what I've gone through. The whole "right to work state" thing is WIDELY misused and misunderstood. It certainly gives employers wider berth in letting someone go...but it doesn't make them exempt from following federal and state unemployment laws AS WELL AS their own company's stated policies (in a contract, employee manual, etc.)
Interesting that you should bring that up. We had such a manual. It was "affectionately" (term used loosely here) referred to as "the blue book." I wish I had a copy of the damn thing; I'd send it to you so you could use it to put yourself to sleep at night. There were several problems with it.
  • It was reactionary, meaning it was written in response to issues and problems that came up, rather than being written in anticipation of these issues coming up. We had a "researcher" working with us back in 1998-99 (on leave from his regular job) who told us as much, but his recommendations were never implemented, best as I can tell. Granted, he was a tough nut to crack, and I would call him an "acquired taste" (meaning that not everyone "got" him or even liked him), but that was no reason to pooh-pooh his ideas.

    Most policies in this manual were nothing more than memos that were posted on the bulletin board, then copied and added to the manual.
  • It was obsolete, including dress-code policies that were neither enforced, nor enforceable. If they were going to require us to wear ties, and dress suits, etc., then they should have paid us enough to buy such clothes! At some point, they quit enforcing that silly dress code, but they never removed it from the manual.
  • It was contradictory, simply because of the way it was haphazardly written, as I described above. You could read parts of it, then find something else in there which either superseded or contradicted it.



We had a former operations manager who liked to post "read and initial" memos, which we were required to read, and then sign. Usually these represented a change in policy, but eventually I noticed that there seemed to be too many of them being posted, and nothing was ever changing as a result of these memos being posted. So I simply rolled my eyes at them ::) and refused to sign them. The first time I did this, it was totally ignored, but the second time, this ops manager had an issue with a subordinate employee who was too lazy to forward a phone call to him. So he posted another of his infamous "read and initial" memos, in which he also printed out and posted the page from the manual detailing proper phone policy and etiquette. Since this did not represent a change in policy, since I did not have any issues with forwarding phone calls (or taking messages in my case since I was usually there at night), since I wasn't even at the station at the time she took the call and refused to forward it to him (remember, I worked nights), since there were too many of these memos, and since I had gotten away without signing memos previously, and since nothing ever changed as a result of these memos (including this one!), I refused to sign it. This went on for a month, until I got another memo ordering me to sign it, at which time, I wrote on the memo (in red ink, which I usually did when I was angry about something, which was usually quite often) a note of my own on the memo protesting the way they had treated me over an issue that I had had absolutely nothing to do with! They put it in my file, but I didn't give a damn. I worked nights, and at that time, they didn't have anyone who was willing or able to do nights. (That saved my ass many times!) As I accurately predicted, nothing changed as a result of the memo, and the employee in question was caught in a lie about six months later, and fired. (Fortunately, they didn't post any more "read and initial" memos; they just did what they should have done the first time.)

About a year after all that, I had the chance to go through my own personnel file, and I took out the copy of that memo which had been placed in there. I felt that I had been treated wrongly over an issue that I had had absolutely nothing to do with, so I felt no guilt whatsoever in removing it. I also learned that another former employee had knifed me in the back over this issue, for no good reason! :mad:

If the researcher's recommendations had been put into place five years earlier, these incidents would not have played out as they did. (Remember, my operations manager was reacting to a situation using a reactionary policy printed in a reactionary manual.)
 
Noncompete's are uninforceable unless under salaried contract. Let them sue you, but don't worry, they won't bother.

I had three employers tell me that I signed a non-compete, I said "sue me". I never heard from them again, except one, which rehired me 2 years later!
 
amfmsw said:
Noncompete's are uninforceable unless under salaried contract. Let them sue you, but don't worry, they won't bother.

I had three employers tell me that I signed a non-compete, I said "sue me". I never heard from them again, except one, which rehired me 2 years later!

That's a roll of the dice. I had an employee under a non-compete walk cross-town a few years ago; had our attorney send a letter threatening legal action and they crumbled like a cookie.

One thing employees should always remember in this time of consolidation: though they may appear to be competitors, radio companies tend to maintain positive relationships with each other at the very top (the CEO level)--because they buy & sell from each other; if not in YOUR market, then in other markets.

In the Big Picture, they're not going to let the problems of a $30,000-a-year (or $300,000-a-year) employee stand in the way of a $30 million deal. In fact, if you ruin a deal in which they stand to make $10 million, you'll have hell to pay.

Beyond that, the "sue me" approach assumes that you have the bucks to hire an attorney to defend against a suit. If they take the bait and sue your butt, you'd better the money or they'll make your life miserable. Point is, many $18,000-a-year jocks don't have the cash to defend themselves against a suit, so smart-ass remarks aren't necessarily the best tack to take.
 
O.K. here are the basics.
1). You signed it, you gotta live with it. Right to work state or not (that has nothing to do with an employment contract. the contract is BINDING no matter what and in every state. A good lesson here is NEVER SIGN A FREAKING CONTRACT without a good lawyer advising you.
2). If you decide to sue your employeer, it will not help you in the shortrun. odds are that any lawsuit will take YEARS to settle and your attorney will take at least 1/2 after he figures your costs in. So unless the settlement is big, odds are it is not worth it.
3). TALK TO AN ATTORNEY! 99% of tort (LAWSUIT) ATTORNEYS WILL TALK WITH YOU AND EVALUATE YOUR CASE for no fee. THAT WAY YOU CAN FIND OUT IF IT IS WORTH EVEN TAKING ACTION ON.
4) NO MATTER HOW MUCH YOU WANT TO HELP OUT YOUR "BROTHER EMPLOYEES"...remember, if you open that can of worms it can very well come back and bite you on the ass. best advice...look out for #1 and move on.
5) pick up the phone and start making calls....talk to stations in other markets...another gig is not going to fall into your lap, you are going to have to work for it.
Quit being a crybaby and get off your behind and get another gig....move on.....in life you either kill or are killed...its all about survival, and NOBODY can make anything happen except yourself, so go get another job and another paycheck. Sell any and all of your crap except some clothes and your car and start over...but don't just sit there and cry about your situation.
Sorry if I sound harsh, but I have been there....and what I learned is god helps those...who help thermselves....so get going!
and good luck.
 
ruger22com said:
O.K. here are the basics.
1). You signed it, you gotta live with it. Right to work state or not (that has nothing to do with an employment contract. the contract is BINDING no matter what and in every state. A good lesson here is NEVER SIGN A FREAKING CONTRACT without a good lawyer advising you.

You are right that the whole "Right to work state" thing is widely misunderstood and has nothing to do with it. You are also right that you should have an attorney review the contract. But when you say "it is BINDING no matter what you and in every state" you are in fantasy land. These non-competes work because managers are good at intimidating air personalities and are able to convince them. Most competitors will honor the non-compete and not hire from their crosstown rival if there are non-competes involved. But that's because they don't dare reveal how utterly unenforceable they are when the employee in question has been FIRED.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom