n0-compete?

[dhunter]

I've been a member of a martial arts school for a little over five years. The school has been going through some rapid expansion by opening a couple of new locations. Recently, there have been some senior students leaving the school, and it turns out that one of the major reasons for this is that you are required to sign a no-compete contract when you get promoted to a certain level. I had not heard of this before, I was under the impression that only instructors were required to do this.

I will most likely get to this level sometime next year. I like the school, but the rapid expansion means that you get to train with the master instructor less and less, and this no-compete contract idea is objectionable to me on a basis of principle. I was talking to a guy that just left the school over the weekend (at a UFC party), and the school he switched to sounds mighty inviting.

I believe strongly in loyalty to your school and instructors, but I'm getting second thoughts with this no-compete issue. Anybody out there ever heard of such a thing, in order to just stay at a school and receive "advanced" training?

[dilligaf]

I wouldn't like to train at a place that tells me what and what i can or cannot do outside the dojo.

[Prince Loeffler]

I've been a member of a martial arts school for a little over five years. The school has been going through some rapid expansion by opening a couple of new locations. Recently, there have been some senior students leaving the school, and it turns out that one of the major reasons for this is that you are required to sign a no-compete contract when you get promoted to a certain level. I had not heard of this before, I was under the impression that only instructors were required to do this.

I will most likely get to this level sometime next year. I like the school, but the rapid expansion means that you get to train with the master instructor less and less, and this no-compete contract idea is objectionable to me on a basis of principle. I was talking to a guy that just left the school over the weekend (at a UFC party), and the school he switched to sounds mighty inviting.

I believe strongly in loyalty to your school and instructors, but I'm getting second thoughts with this no-compete issue. Anybody out there ever heard of such a thing, in order to just stay at a school and receive "advanced" training?


Hello !

Non-Compete aggreement is a standard practice used by employers to prevent employee's from using the knowledge they have aquired from their during the course of their employment in engaging a similar practice of business when they leave.

The real issue would be. Is it legal ? In some state it is ! In California, a non-compete agreement is enforceable only if someone sells a business and agrees not to compete with the new owner. That aside, California employers cannot restrict the livelihood of their current or former employees.

Are they enforceable ? again in some states they are not. I am not familiar with the business laws in your states. It is advisable to seek counseling with an licensed attorney to gain more insights regarding the non-compete clause.

[dhunter]

this is not an employment situtation, this is an instructor telling a student, "ok, you've gotten to the level where you now begin advanced training, so I want you to sign this agreement that protects ME from you going out and starting a school or teaching somewhere else". to me, that's saying that the knowledge and skill he is going to give you still belongs to him. I don't care if it's enforceable or not, i have no plans on teaching. I just find the whole idea a little odd, at the least.

[Shitoryu Dude]

I'd leave - they are obviously more concerned about making money than they are about training.

[trevorg]

this is not an employment situtation, this is an instructor telling a student, "ok, you've gotten to the level where you now begin advanced training, so I want you to sign this agreement that protects ME from you going out and starting a school or teaching somewhere else". to me, that's saying that the knowledge and skill he is going to give you still belongs to him. I don't care if it's enforceable or not, i have no plans on teaching. I just find the whole idea a little odd, at the least.

Over here in the UK you can arrange a no compete contract only in terms of selling a business, or if you employ a person who might have access to your customers and has the knowledge to set up on their own. In this case it is quite legitimate to have a no compete clause,although it is legally more enforceable to agree to a confidentiality clause whereby what you have learnt about the business you cannot take elsewhere, or perhaps not approach the client database for six months.

This sounds to me as though it would be more appropriate because it is really very common for students once they have reached 1st dan to set up on their own and attract students from their original school.

My view is that it would quite a reasonable thing to ask students to sign once they are reaching instructor stage, simply because of the risk of losing income due to the knowledge that has been passed on . Of course, you dont have to sign any contract, but if you dont then I guess you just leave anyway.

[riceluvr]

I agree, this is typically a buisness situation I would think that means the buisness is more important to someone that the student

[Shitoryu Dude]

Running your own school at Shodan? That seems more than a bit premature to me - aren't most head instructors Yondan or higher?

[MJ Dougherty]

I think that a senior instructor has the right to restrict people going off and founding schools in his system without permission. For example, I want more than a black belt before I let someone run their own class, because I don't believe that just a black belt makes an instuctor (not usually, anyway).

In the UK you can get insurance to teach martial arts by ticking a box that says you're a black belt. Someone could leave then set up a school teaching my stuff without my permissionm and without meeting my requirements to be an instructor.

So, I would be OK with someone saying 'you can't found a school in our style without permission', but I would object to the idea that an instructor in Klobbalotz who I trained with wants a contract that stops me teaching Wranglenek, a system I learned elsewhere and isn't any of his business.

I don't believe that is enforceable, and it's certainly morally dubious.

[P Goldsbury]

Here in Japan there might be commercial agreements, but not in the world of the martial arts as far as I am aware. It is unlikely for anyone to open a dojo until around 6th dan and all my colleagues at this level have more or less ceased to train at the main dojo and have opened their own dojos, with the consent and support of the chief instructor who has taught us.

[trevorg]

Unfortunately, it's all too easy in the UK. Without a restrictive covenant (we call it that) then a student could leave and open his/her own club with the possibility of dragging their erstwhile friends/students with them and cause loss of earnings to the former teacher.

I believe the issue of a 'new style' is misleading because anyone can change what they have learnt and call it a 'new style' , but the main point does not relate to style but to loss.

However, a covenant in place that restricts the ex-student from approaching existing students for a period of time is very practical and sensible. Simply put, why should someone suck out all the information from a teacher (or boss), open their stall for business and approach ex-fellow students (clients) at no cost to themselves, but to the financial detriment of their former teacher ? A six month exclusion zone is sufficient for the former teacher to consolidate his position and for the ex-student to build up their new business.

[Human]

You are all assuming that the "no-compete" refers to a student competing in terms of business ie. the student won't start his own school. I interpreted it more as an agreement that the student will not enter competitions.

Which is it?

[dhunter]

the non-compete would bar the student from opening a school or teaching at another school. i'm not sure about the specifics, but i believe it's one year and a 30-mile radius from any of the existing school's sites. if the student is also an intructor at the school, the non-compete agreement is even more restrictive.

competition is encouraged but not stressed. no one is compelled to compete or train for competition. the school does quite well in BJJ and submission wrestling tournaments, and has won the team trophy at a few. there are a few guys that fight in local MMA productions, those types of guys tend to leave when faced with the non-compete contract.

[trevorg]

You are all assuming that the "no-compete" refers to a student competing in terms of business ie. the student won't start his own school. I interpreted it more as an agreement that the student will not enter competitions.

Which is it?

There is no mention of entering competitions. I think you are making a literal translation of 'no compete', which strictly should be as far as your thinking is concerned 'no competing'. If you are right that would be entirely unenforceable.

[cxt]

dhunter

Sounds to me like this would cause as many people to leave as it would keep people around.

Probably makes the guys competion pretty happy with skilled people quiting on a regular basis and all needing a place to train.

On the other hand, how really different is that than the koryu that only allow certain people to teach?

[Mr. T.]

Hi mr. Hunter,

It's kind of strange that higher ranked members aren't allowed to compete. Competition can be a great tool in your development as a MAist. To forbit your student to grow by competing sounds very fishy. I've heard and met instructors/ teacher that do not encourage or even discourage competition, but never some one who forbit it. However, a lot of dojo like their students to compete, it helps them to deal with the stress of fighting and student can test their techniques. Sparring and randori are great, but nothing beats the stress and fear of a "real" fight. Even during an iai shiai (just kata) I've seen people (and I've done) the weirdest things because of the stress that competition brings.

If your MA make competition possible (for example, most aikido styles do not) a teacher shouldn't forbit the possibility of competition. The instructor might discourage it, but not forbit it. If a student desides to compete, the instructor should be accept it and help the student to prepair for it, or find some who can.

In my opinion, an instructor should be proud when a student desides to compete in a (contact) MA. It takes a lot of dedication and training in the art to compete in MA without getting a serious @$$whoping. Something every instructor wants from a student, dedication and hard work.

To forbit it, sounds weird. If my instructor does that, I know it's time for me to leave and find another one.

[Chris McLean]

People are going to do what ever they want green belts dawn black belts and start back yard styles all the time. Who cares no one of any quality is going to give them the time of day. McDojos do all kinds of funny things to manipulate students all the time. Quality people who are members of international organizations don’t need to play games. The style and organization have governing systems in place to serves them.

[dhunter]

I might have not made myself clear here. Senior students are not forbidden to compete, they are forbidden by the contract to open competing schools or teach at competing schools ("competing" in a business sense).

People with prior advanced training and/or MMA competition experience have been told they must sign the non-compete contract before joining the school, so that they also cannot start another school or teach elsewhere. I believe this has cost the school high-level practitioners and potential instructors from joining.

None of this has anything to do with encouraging or discouraging competition on the mats, in the ring or in the cage. This has to do with stifling potential economic competition with the school. The junior students are unaware of this or don't care. The senior students are forced to make a choice, whether they intend to ever teach or not. I will be face with this choice some time in the near future, probably next year, and wanted to know if this is standard practice in the industry. This only affects me if I decide to teach somewhere, and while I believe in "never say never", I don't anticiapte this happening. However, the principle involved troubles me, hence my interest in getting feedback on the subject.

[trevorg]

I might have not made myself clear here. Senior students are not forbidden to compete, they are forbidden by the contract to open competing schools or teach at competing schools ("competing" in a business sense).

People with prior advanced training and/or MMA competition experience have been told they must sign the non-compete contract before joining the school, so that they also cannot start another school or teach elsewhere. I believe this has cost the school high-level practitioners and potential instructors from joining.

None of this has anything to do with encouraging or discouraging competition on the mats, in the ring or in the cage. This has to do with stifling potential economic competition with the school. The junior students are unaware of this or don't care. The senior students are forced to make a choice, whether they intend to ever teach or not. I will be face with this choice some time in the near future, probably next year, and wanted to know if this is standard practice in the industry. This only affects me if I decide to teach somewhere, and while I believe in "never say never", I don't anticiapte this happening. However, the principle involved troubles me, hence my interest in getting feedback on the subject.

It is not standard practice for any ma in the UK, but it is common in business as a whole. Personally I dont have a problem with it and nor do the people to whom I give such contracts. However, it is a point of law that it takes two to make a contract, and remember you dont have to sign. If you dont sign what is the penalty ?

[dhunter]

the penalty would be walking away from a school that I've spent 5+ years at: the memories, friendships, blood, sweat and tears.

[trevorg]

the penalty would be walking away from a school that I've spent 5+ years at: the memories, friendships, blood, sweat and tears.

That's tough, but better than staying under the cosh. On the other hand if you dont believe you would set up in business competition to your teacher then it doesn't matter. The difficulty comes when you have signed some onerous contract and then wish to set up your own outfit. My only advice would be that before you sign get it checked out by a lawyer to see if the restrictions are reasonable. If they are not, ie you cant open within a 20 mile radius (which might encompass the whole town you live in) then that is clearly unreasonable and you could not be held liable in law, so effectively you could go ahead and sign it anyway and not be held ultimately responsible, but check it out as I said. This is not legal advice..