What are considered "competitors" when looking for work?

[feelit83]

Im just curious. Technically, CVS is NOT a direct competitor with Kmart, Walmart, target, and grocers like costco, samsclub, publix, etc.? So could somone work for CVS and costco and still be incompliance with corporate policies with dual emploment? Or is any associated "retail" pharmacy prohibited? I need 2 full time pharmacy jobs when i graduate so i can afford that condo on lakeshore one salary just wont swing it!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Old Timer]

Im just curious. Technically, CVS is NOT a direct competitor with Kmart, Walmart, target, and grocers like costco, samsclub, publix, etc.? So could somone work for CVS and costco and still be incompliance with corporate policies with dual emploment? Or is any associated "retail" pharmacy prohibited? I need 2 full time pharmacy jobs when i graduate so i can afford that condo on lakeshore one salary just wont swing it!

I would think CVS would not allow you to work for another retail company. You would have to clear this with your pharmacy supervisor or DM.

 

[WVUPharm2007]

**** that, just prostitute on the side....or move somewhere cheaper. I can buy a damn 3,000 SF house in this town on Cheat Lake for about $500,000. Working 80 hours will make you want to kill puppies and small children.

 

[confettiflyer]

Laws governing non-compete agreements vary by state. In California, non-compete agreements are illegal except in a very narrow scope regarding the sale of a business. This means, at least in CA, an employer cannot restrict an employee's livelihood. Many other states allow non-compete agreements, but impose restrictions of varying degrees.

Many large businesses, CVS included, include a non-compete agreement in employment offers/contracts even with full knowledge that such an agreement is unenforceable in many states. It's often used as an intimidation tactic (often subtle) to keep employees in line.

I signed a non-compete in CA with CVS when I was hired with full knowledge that it was invalid from day 1. I can walk into Wags across the street, work there 2 days a week, tell my PIC or DM at CVS that I'm doing it, and they won't be able to do anything about it. If there is retaliation, hello large court settlement

 

[bananaface]

A competitor operates the same type of facility in the same geographical area and could serve your typical patient. Most any pair of retail stores would be competitors within a geographical area. A hospital outpatient pharmacy or a retail style pharmacy run by an HMO would not be a competitor to a typical retail pharmacy, as those facilities are open only to a narrowly defined patient base that doesn't overlap much with the normal retail patient base.

 

[Caverject]

I can't believe this question had to be asked...

 

[Old Timer]

Laws governing non-compete agreements vary by state. In California, non-compete agreements are illegal except in a very narrow scope regarding the sale of a business. This means, at least in CA, an employer cannot restrict an employee's livelihood. Many other states allow non-compete agreements, but impose restrictions of varying degrees.

Many large businesses, CVS included, include a non-compete agreement in employment offers/contracts even with full knowledge that such an agreement is unenforceable in many states. It's often used as an intimidation tactic (often subtle) to keep employees in line.

I signed a non-compete in CA with CVS when I was hired with full knowledge that it was invalid from day 1. I can walk into Wags across the street, work there 2 days a week, tell my PIC or DM at CVS that I'm doing it, and they won't be able to do anything about it. If there is retaliation, hello large court settlement

This is not a non-compete clause. I think you should check with an attorney. You are not competing with CVS/Walgreens. You have knowledge of Corporation A operational procedures. You cannot share them by also working for Corporation B. Corporation A can restrict you. I know CA has wacky laws, but I have never heard of a non-compete clause in regards to concurrent employment without the employee having an ownership interest in one of the jobs....

 

[confettiflyer]

This is not a non-compete clause. I think you should check with an attorney. You are not competing with CVS/Walgreens. You have knowledge of Corporation A operational procedures. You cannot share them by also working for Corporation B. Corporation A can restrict you. I know CA has wacky laws, but I have never heard of a non-compete clause in regards to concurrent employment without the employee having an ownership interest in one of the jobs....

From my understanding of the law, it is assumed a person gains a certain amount of knowledge during the course of their work (operational procedures, client names, etc...) that they inevitably take it to their next place of work. Any law restricting this would, in essence, restrict free trade, which is a federal issue, concurrently employed or not. There is a fine line, though, between non-compete agreements and regulation of trade secrets.

 

[vardenafil]

there is an older pharmacist that i talk to probally 15 times a day during the course of buisness ... (even though i never personally met him). he is very freindy and bluntly honest. he works for a chain pharmacy across the street from mine. anyways i took upon myself a second job (from another chain pharmacy) and my store manager basically threatend me that he would fire me if i continued to work for the other pharmacy even though i had written permission from my dpm at the time. anyways i talked to this older pharmacist and i guess he was in the same situation i was only a few years earlier. but he WAS actually fired for working at another pharmacy in town. he filled a lawsuit against the company that fired him and won. he would not tell me what the settlement was or the details of the settlement but they had to 'pay him out'. anyways long story short i mentioned this guys story to my store manager 'in the passing' and he hasnt bothered me since. but i think it comes down to the fact that unless they pay you to be on call on your time off. that cant dictate what you do on your off hours. they cant tell you that you are unable to have a second job and support your family.