Get rid! We have a restraint of trade clause in our contracts, no one who leaves our employ can work as, work for, act as an agent (paid or unpaid) a window cleaner in any of the geographical areas that we cover. If they did we would sue them for 100% of theit turnover + damages
you may find by law this is not inforceable, or I guess it is not worded that they cannot work in any geographical area that you cover.
The reason for this is as far as I am aware you cannot restrict where someone works
I went to a solicitor in regards to this when I worked for an internet company they had a restrictive covenant in my contract , sadly they overlooked the fact that I lived to near where I work rendering thier contract null and void for the reason I would be unable to work as this was my trade.
You can however stop them from targeting your client base for a time period
maybe things have changed now, and would be interested to know the legal facts on this,
I have took this from a site to help you and others ::
How to enforce a restraint of trade clause in an employment contract
Introduction
Restraint of trade clauses are becoming increasingly common in employment contracts. A typical clause will prohibit a former employee from working in a specific area of employment in a specific geographical area for a limited period of time. These clauses are enforced by suing the ex-employee, usually in the Employment Court.
The purpose of a restraint of trade clause is to prevent the employee from later using the employer’s trade secrets or confidential information to aid one of the employer’s competitors.
What action can I take to enforce the clause?
If you believe that an ex-employee is breaching a restraint of trade clause, you can bring proceedings for breach of contract. If the clause is in an employment contract the Employment Court has exclusive jurisdiction to deal with your claim.
How will the court decide the issue?
Formerly the courts were reluctant to enforce restraint of trade clauses, on the grounds that an individual’s right to work should not be limited. But this attitude has been relaxed and now the courts will look at the restrictions imposed by the clause and the general history of the ex-employee’s period of employment.
However, the starting point is that the clause is assumed to be invalid, and you, the ex-employer, have the burden of showing that the clause is reasonable and should be upheld.
In deciding whether the restraint should be enforced, the courts will consider whether it is:
unfairly restrictive
essential to protect your business interests
against the public interest
In general the greater the restraint – whether in terms of geographical area, time or the type of business – the more likely the court will be to hold that the restraint clause is invalid.
.
Ian