Has anyone successfully renegotiated an AWS non-compete?

I can’t answer your specific question, but I would really encourage you to think more about the AWS offer.

Having spent a decade at Amazon, across several organizations, I don’t recommend it as a place to work.

There was a NYTimes article about the company in 2015. Everything there still reflects the day to day culture of the company.

For me Amazon took an unprecedented toll on my mental and physical health. I did earn enough money, but I immensely regret all the time I didn’t spend with my family over the years, all the friendships that faded, and the constant reminder from leaders how I could always do better - nothing was ever good enough.

Amazons leadership fundamentally does not see their employees as human beings. As I grew the ranks over the years, I was directly coached on removing myself from certain day to day interactions, because it would simplify decision making if I didn’t have an interest in my own people, that simply forming just work bonds was a conflict of interest in terms of doing what’s “right” for the company.

Any non compete you’re concerned about isn’t even the tip of the iceberg.

Good luck to you.

You should better consult a lawyer than a bunch of random people if this is important for you. Or better yet: not work for a company that tries to make you sign such agreements. And especially not this one :)

I don't know where you live. In my country (France) overly broad non compete are not enforceable, and also you need to be paid during the non compete period (at least 1/3 of your compensation or something like this), which means that employers will almost always waive them except for very rare exceptions.

This why I turned down a job offer from AWS:

https://www.lastweekinaws.com/blog/why-i-turned-down-an-aws-...

They made me feel like a jackass when I did.

Less than a year later I was vindicated:

https://www.lastweekinaws.com/blog/aws-ruins-own-attempt-at-...

And your timing is apt! "Should I Accept an AWS Job Offer?" went up yesterday: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCiUulzr9f8

If you’re asking us here in HN, then it’s very unlikely that you have the sort of negotiating power required to get any sizable company to approve a customized set of legal documents relating to your hire. Changes to the standard set of hiring paperwork often require multiple managers and lawyers to sign off on it. For most positions and candidates, the effort isn’t considered worth it. You can certainly ask, but don’t be surprised if you get a hard “sorry, but no” in response.

If you were being hired in as a VP or CxO and were extremely well known, that’d be one thing. But only a few people have that sort of privilege and clout.

(Disclaimer: I work for AWS but am not involved in the hiring process other than interviewing. My views may not represent those of my employer. Opinions are my own.)

I'm not a lawyer, and this is almost certainly misguided advice. But when faced with the same, I requested (and got) in writing that the non-compete clause was nonnegotiable, hoping that, should push come to shove, the clause could be found legally non-binding as a contract of adhesion [1].

Also note that Massachusetts recently (2018) signed into law restrictions on non-competes. One of the major aspects is that such a clause provide "garden leave" pay for employees during their noncompete period. [2]

You can alternatively/also simply ask for more pay in compensation, claiming such a clause is non-standard in the field (personally, I've seen very few), and thus it's a material change to what was previously negotiated. That didn't work for me (I was already at the top of the salary range for the level I was assigned to), but since it doesn't involve lawyers, it's more likely to happen.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_form_contract#Contrac...

[2] https://www.slnlaw.com/massachusetts-non-compete-act.html

If you are in certain states (e.g. California) non-comps are almost wholly unenforceable and many folks will happily sign them knowing even a company like AWS won't be able to do squat.

Jurisdiction matters, as non-comps are common, and many firms rely on a lack of knowing to pressure folks into behaving the way they like, regardless of actual legal sturdiness.

Save this link for the day when AWS enforces the non-compete against you: http://www.byrneskeller.com/attorneys/keith-d-petrak/ As far as I can tell, this gentleman's entire business is to handle AWS refugees, at least in Seattle. I personally know dozens of people, of all levels, who have used his services.

Some commenters on this thread think that they are too unimportant for AWS to harass them after they leave. The issue is not how important the employee is, but how dangerous a competitor the next employer is from the perspective of AWS. If AWS wants to slow down the competitor, they will use all legal means available to them.

I got a lawyer to look over mine when I was leaving AWS, not for a direct competitor of the team I was on but for a company that does work in an area Amazon is involved in. Washington state.

His advice was thus: technically I am prohibited from working at this new company; Amazon would need to be aware of my new role to enforce it; courts have expressed criticism of over broad non competes so I could challenge it if it came to that. I was not L7+ so his added advice was basically keep your head down for the next 18 months.

It’s bullshit though, and from now on I will always engage an employment lawyer before signing on anywhere. He looked over my new company’s non competes and they are much more reasonable.

Get a lawyer.

I used to work in LegalTech, and contracts have a ton of little bits and things that can get the outcome Amazon would want in a legal battle. Provisions, Certain wording, etc. I've seen all kinds of nasty shit employers try to pull, from trying to prevent interactions with (any) "institutions", to my salary being "conferred" (a gift, not consideration) to me by the company at it's discretion.

For one, in this comment section, I see people suggesting you move to California, but in my experiences contracts often have a Governing Law provision, usually set in a jurisdiction the assigning party would feel comfortable in. Again, not a lawyer, I don't know how California's law works, but, if you worked in California, and the Governing law provision says Delaware, well, guess where you're (probably) flying to for those proceedings.

The only time I would ever sign a noncompete like that is if it came with 18 months of severance pay. That's ludicrous.

Non-legal opinion: you are unlikely to be able to get the company to deviate from the standard agreements, they are enforceable in WA, and in practice they would have to show harms to really have any teeth on you besides making your life tediously miserable with legal paperwork. I am not a lawyer, if you want advice you should talk to an employment specialist who practices in your jurisdiction. If you are in WA and e-mail me I can recommend someone I've worked with in the past.

Not a lawyer, but I have seen this exact thing in the past and discussed it with our lawyer. He advised to say that the scope was overly broad, point out as you have that AMZN does absolutely everything, suggest that you either see what they say in response, or you suggest you would be happy to agree to a reasonable narrowly scoped provision (e.g. not to work on products directly competitive to the products you worked on at AMZN).

I'm not sure making this about confidential information is helpful -- there are already other provisions in the contract, I'm sure, relating to that.

In general yes all contracts are up for renegotiation and in house lawyers fully expect this kind of push back. If they rescind the offer then they're a.holes and you shouldn't work for them anyway.

It seems to be a concept in law that you can't enforce overly broad and unreasonable provisions like this so they are being a bit cheeky slipping it in anyway. Again there's a legal term I forget for this but it means "something only a fool would agree to".

You're misreading the agreement (unless it's changed significantly very recently). Like any non-compete I've ever seen/signed, it only applies to products/services that:

> Employee worked on or supported, or about which Employee obtained or received Confidential Information.

Totally fair if you don't want to enter that agreement, but the language is pretty standard.

I think it should be federal law that any non-compete pays the employee salary and full benefits for time spent under the enforceable period of the non-compete if the employer tries to enforce it in court. If it's SO important that an employee not divulge any information that you need a contract for it, companies should have to pay for it.

I can't give you legal advice, but I can ask you to consider if you really want to work for AWS. It may be a generic clause, but they are basically saying they don't trust you. Also telling recruiters of other FAANG / big corp / etc. you got an AWS offer should increase your leverage.

If it helps: Amazon, Google etc are using these non-compete agreements almost exclusively against the executives who jump ship. Here's are some cases of AWS→ Google Cloud:

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/11/aws-case-against-worker-who-...

https://www.brodyandassociates.com/blog/even-amazon-trouble-...

I personally as an individual contributor (IC) who's not a distinguished engineer would not worry much about Amazon chasing me down to my next job. Not a legal advice obviously.

Former Amazonian. I didn't renegotiate the non-competes and I wouldn't stress much about this.

To my knowledge, this is one of those overly broad statements they put into the contract because it's advantageous to them and to reserve the right to sue the "VP of something" who took the knowledge and ran away. They won't act on it for your regular employees because it costs them money to do so and developers _routinely_ jump ship, though they want you to know that they technically have the power to because you signed that contract.

Like others said, there are other problems with Amazon you might want to focus on. This one may not be worth fighting over, but you can use it as part of a response with multiple requests, to let them say no to something and accept your other requests.

Tell them this is significant to you and ask for, say, +30% of total comp to sign the contract in the current wording. This they will understand. If you say no or if you give reasons they will just try to make you change your mind and give you excuses. Don't waste your time.

Generally, are non-competes even enforceable? Especially in industries (like cloud providers) where there is a very small number of players.

Move to California?

AWS is on my list of places I would never apply or work at. This post just reinforces my opinion on that.

Tell HN: anyone with good knowledge about something like this will not tell you on Hacker News. Probably not even in private.

Think about it: if you had issues with AWS related to your non-compete, you probably reached some form of agreement or settlement. I'd assume in a large number of these cases, part of the agreement is to not disclose anything about it in public.

Take my two cents: talk to a good, really good, lawyer.

Amazon are struggling for engineers lately. There's a good chance if you just don't sign it they won't bat an eyelid.

Amazon will enforce them at the exec level, but courts have ruled they aren't a total blanket ban on employment elsewhere, just a restriction on what you can do for that new employer.

"This past October, a federal judge placed major limitations on his Moyer’s role while also criticizing Amazon’s non-compete policies. Moyer was not allowed to work on any financial services projects, his area of expertise at AWS, for Google Cloud. He was also barred from contacting any AWS customers and any potential financial services customers. The conditions were to stay in place until the lawsuit was fully resolved, or until his non-compete expired in November 2020."

https://www.geekwire.com/2020/amazon-settles-non-compete-law...

What would be the downside of banning all non-competes (no exceptions) at the Federal level?

You’re saying that just asking will cause them to pull the offer. That would be bizarre behavior. If that’s accurate, do you want to work for them? You don’t. And you don’t have to.

My first proper job after being a freelancer I felt it had an overly broad clause about ownership of work done in my private time. When I asked, they clarified, and I told them directly, that makes sense, but that’s not what’s written. They just changed it for me! No problem! It was no Amazon but a large company in my book.

If (with the help of a lawyer) it isn’t clarified to your liking, do not work for them.

No is good.

I'm curious:

1. Do you live+work in a state where non-competes are enforceable?

2. Does the contract say they need to compensate you (e.g. some % of salary) for the period during which they want to enforce the non-compete?

You should get a consult with an employment attorney before agreeing to this to understand the specifics. In WA, very likely enforceable if you make over $100k. Also they are unlikely to negotiate for a non executive position.

If you are in CA(or ND or a few others) this would not be an issue at all. Non competes are illegal with few exceptions.

Amazon does have a history of enforcing this against competing employers/former employees, against working at google or microsoft specifically

I always clarify scope on non-competes. Even if you can get an email back from an HR person clarifying scope, that should be sufficient. They will take it to legal and legal will come back with what they can do. For example, in the last non-compete I signed, it was phrased as something like "Company's business". I clarified that "company's business is X", giving X in my own words.

If you are worried about asking you will be worried about just breaking it in the future. Keep that in mind when signing because employment/reference checks will become worrisome.

There are plenty of areas where Amazon doesn't compete and plenty of areas they do compete. If you stay away from bigger firms you should be okay.

Should you accept the offer is laying low a strategy you can live with for 18 months?

On an AWS team currently, some of our best left to similar'ish google cloud products. No issues there.

The turnover rate is extremely high at Amazon. I don't even consider my non-compete clause when looking at other roles. If you're really worried then don't update your linkedin right away when you leave. After a few months no one will notice.

What's your offer monetarily?

I've read the following things:

- Amazon caps salary, and uses stock options for comp

- vesting is 3-5 years, and Amazon loves forcing people out before you vest, either by natural attrition from their toxic HR practices/stack ranking/ridiculous workloads, or by just forcing you out

On top of that, they will then noncompete you after you leave?

AVOID.

Just FYI, this also applies while you work there. This makes it almost impossible to do any open source work, or have personal projects that you'd like to retain ownership of.

It's one of the reasons I left Amazon after nearly a decade. There was stuff I wanted to do and the non compete made it impossible.

What state are you in? What Amazon can enforce will vary widely from state to state. Ask a lawyer. I had all my non-compete questions about a particular situation covered in one phone call of 45 billable minutes. This does not have to be expensive if you get a specialist in this area of the law.

If you have to ask you can’t negotiate it. And if you try to you’ll be labeled as <…> and rejected.

Talk to a lawyer or just say no. Whatever the lawyer costs you, it won't be as bad as getting yourself in a sticky situation because of the non compete. Or if you turn it down, you can definitely get a job elsewhere if you got an offer from amazon

Ask them for a list of all businesses this covers so you can make an informed decision?

Work in California as it is mostly not enforceable

You should ask for a list of known competitors. Examples.

Or you provide a list and ask them if they agree you cannot work at those.

Ask an attorney. I don't think non-compete agreements are valid in some states like California.

In SC an overly broad noncompete can’t prevent you from earning a living using the skills you have.

Who's to say where you work after you leave one employer and go to another?

Move to California - then this will be unenforceable :)

Here's some info on the relevant law as it pertains to California (where AWS is based). TLDR: "non-compete agreements are not enforceable in California"

https://www.callahan-law.com/are-non-competes-enforceable-in...

If you live somewhere else, I don't know if California law would apply or your local laws, so like other said you should consult an attorney who specializes in this area.

Don’t bother if below L8.

Google is notorious for treating their new hires an employees badly. It's not only a customer hostile company, it's also very hostile to its employees.