Is it common for sell-side companies (such as software firms) to ask for non-compete agreements (6 months to 1 year)?

If you have a choice, don't take a job with non-compete agreement.

I've seen it happen. As ymous says, only accept it if you need it. If you're in a strong negotiating position (i.e. several competing offers), then just negotiate it out if important to you. Remember to think of the worse case scenario - you might be unable to apply to a similar role if things turn sour at your current position, unless you're willing to deal with the backlash!

Even if you negotiate it out, there is no guarantee that 6 months, a year, or two years down the line you aren't asked to sign one while on the job.

QuoteOriginally posted by: blycmEven if you negotiate it out, there is no guarantee that 6 months, a year, or two years down the line you aren't asked to sign one while on the job.And it's easier to negotiate the compensation for the non-compete now than later.

Non-competes are typically negotiated with a buyout package when you leave the firm at their request.

blycm is right, you are most likely to encounter a non-compete while employed and about to receive a bonus. You are perfectly free not to accept the bonus, but if you would like to have it, there is this little piece of paper we would like you to sign. I have seen this first hand twice. Whether you can later successfully argue that you signed under duress and that it should be disregarded is, I think, an open question, and undoubtedly dependent on jurisdiction.

QuoteOriginally posted by: bearishblycm is right, you are most likely to encounter a non-compete while employed and about to receive a bonus. You are perfectly free not to accept the bonus, but if you would like to have it, there is this little piece of paper we would like you to sign. I have seen this first hand twice. Whether you can later successfully argue that you signed under duress and that it should be disregarded is, I think, an open question, and undoubtedly dependent on jurisdiction.Cheeky! Although not surprising. Having said that, I'd love to see what legislation (if any) there is regarding the "under duress" aspect.

For what it's worth, non-compete agreements are unenforceable under California law. This is one reason that technology companies have thrived in California. In the beginning there was Fairchild Semiconductor, which begat National Semiconductor which begat Intel and Advanced Microdevices and...I have a friend who had a non-compete agreement, but they agreed to pay his full salary and benefits for a year while the non-compete was in force. As long as the agreement would not limit me from doing my own trading models and market trading, I could definitely live with such an agreement.

"Duress" varies a lot from place to place.Being offered money to sign something is hard to qualify as duress, so an employer may say "we really like your work and want to show commitment to you, so your bonus will be X this year after you sign this contract".In UK law there is a specific case where BZW was sold by Barclays to Credit Suisse.Useful people were offered money not to leave.They took the money, which was not only large in absolute terms but was large enough to them personally to alter their motivations.Then they left.Under European law, as implemented in England, you can't sign away your rights during a takeover, no matter how good the price you are offered.Given that they were offered seriously money to keep doing a job they had already chosen to do, hard to see this as duress, but the law was designed to protect much more junior people who might be offered a tiny amount of cash and told "sign this or we fire you" and claiming the rights were "compensated for".DISCLAIMER DO NOT try this stunt without a serious lawyer OKing it first.Duress also requires evidence, since UK & US courts assume you have read and understood and agreed to anything you sign unless you produce evidence that it was not kosher.Saying "a lot of people were being fired and I feared for my job" sucks.