I have been offered a job as a junior software engineer (with little to no previous experience) in a scale up.
I have not accepted yet, as it turns out they have a very restrictive non compete clause that I have been trying to make less restrictive: I am indeed not sure I will keep the job for long, as I need to relocate and this might not work out in the long term for a few reasons.
They say they may have been able to modify the clause, but the CEO wants to speak to me first. What she says is along the lines of:
- intellectual property is key for our business
- we will sue people not respecting the non compete
- hiring a junior is risky because he might want to leave for a better position, even if the position is already good, out of inexperience
- do not join us if you do not have the mindset to stay 5 years. If you think of committing for 2 years (possibly switching to a competitor), don't join. We invest a lot of money in training you, and you leaving for another company will be very stressful because of intellectual property reasons
I really was thinking about joining for 1/2 years and then see, 5 years sounds too long. Let us assume now that the revised non compete is satisfactory.
What are reasons not to join them with the current plan?
Also, is it a good idea to mention that the timeframes do not quite match, but things would change if they reconsidered letting me work remotely after some time? This possibility was excluded at the beginning, but as the team is geographically distributed, this might be feasible.
I have detailed the CEO part because it sounds a bit strange that I got this meeting. The CEO said that editing the contract and non compete might take long, and that the HR manager that I was negotiating with, might have overlooked this aspect. If you think this is a red flag please mention this in your answer.