> the best thing we as engineers can do is be aware of the types of contracts we're signing
I'd argue that the best thing we can do is to not just make generalizations about what is OK to sign or not. Confidentiality agreements and non-competes are fine if they are narrowly focused, fair, and your compensation is sufficient to make it worth the restrictions. Because that is what a contract really is - a balancing act between obligations and limitations put on yourself contrasted with benefits (money) given to you in exchange.
So an absurd non-compete is fine if they pay me a lot of money for it. An confidentiality clause is fine if they pay me a lot of money for it.
This becomes critical when looking at all the recent layoffs. Most severance packages are exactly this type of contract - confidentiality and other restrictions in exchange for your severance pay.
Should you sign? Maybe. Maybe the severance pay is worth it. Read the contract, understand it, and make a choice.
I'd argue that the best thing we can do is to not just make generalizations about what is OK to sign or not. Confidentiality agreements and non-competes are fine if they are narrowly focused, fair, and your compensation is sufficient to make it worth the restrictions. Because that is what a contract really is - a balancing act between obligations and limitations put on yourself contrasted with benefits (money) given to you in exchange.
So an absurd non-compete is fine if they pay me a lot of money for it. An confidentiality clause is fine if they pay me a lot of money for it.
This becomes critical when looking at all the recent layoffs. Most severance packages are exactly this type of contract - confidentiality and other restrictions in exchange for your severance pay.
Should you sign? Maybe. Maybe the severance pay is worth it. Read the contract, understand it, and make a choice.