Thread: Am I about to shoot myself in the foot?

Once again, I come to the greats of L4P for answers to questions that can only be answered with experience. . . or at least better judgment.

Currently I work in the advertising department for a decently sized company, we will call it (A). I also run consulting for a handfull of companies and have been getting quite an influx of clients lately. One of those clients that has contacted me will be called (B). Company (B) is in DIRECT competition with company (A) and from what I have gathered they have been fighting with each other for years over market share. By direct competition, I don't mean they are in the same area, I mean they are almost the same company but branded differently.

This is where my question comes in; Would it be wrong to accept (B) as a client and develop a marketing strategy that could by chance effect the dominance of company (A)?

If I take (B) as a client, it could mean a lot more work/ money in my own business; If I stick with just (A), the competition will remain in submission and I will have job security but less money in the process. I have a general idea of what i'm going to do/ not do in my head but a second opinion would be great.

You could be risking A to take on extra with B. Most companies have guidelines in the employee standards that would prevent you from legally being able to work for both. If A is your primary employer, they could legally have precedence over your work. They *could* argue that your intellectual property that you are providing to B comes from the work you do for A.

You might ought to seek out an employment attorney to make sure you aren't crossing any legal boundaries. Wouldn't want to lose your job AND get sued.

Originally Posted by wickedlysane

You could be risking A to take on extra with B. Most companies have guidelines in the employee standards that would prevent you from legally being able to work for both. If A is your primary employer, they could legally have precedence over your work. They *could* argue that your intellectual property that you are providing to B comes from the work you do for A.

You might ought to seek out an employment attorney to make sure you aren't crossing any legal boundaries. Wouldn't want to lose your job AND get sued.

I checked my guidelines and I am covered; there would be no legal boundaries crossed. This question is almost purely moral.

Morally, I think it's wrong. Have the things that A has taught you while working for them going to come into play while taking on B as a side client? Unless all your knowledge and ability to provide to B came from outside your job with A, you shouldn't do it. But as they say on the internet, that's JMHO.

If things don't work out with B, and you lose your job at A, would you be able to get by anyway with your other clients and make a decent living? Don't do it unless you're prepared to quit / lose your job at A.

if its a moral question I say go for it! people take skills they learn at one job and apply them at their next job (or business) every single day. employees usually quit first but i say if you arent breaking company A's rules then all is fair

Originally Posted by c6vette

if its a moral question I say go for it! people take skills they learn at one job and apply them at their next job (or business) every single day. employees usually quit first but i say if you arent breaking company A's rules then all is fair

I whole-heatedly agree with this statement...(for example, god forbid this ever happen to you but) If you lost your job tomorrow, you wouldn't go find a new job in the marketing industry and not apply the skills you learned from your previous company, I say go for it.

Originally Posted by Adrenaline981

This is where my question comes in; Would it be wrong to accept (B) as a client and develop a marketing strategy that could by chance effect the dominance of company (A)?

There will no doubt be a lawsuit in the future if (A) were to find out. They would look into your records and make sure that nothing you did for (B) was on their company time and if so, they would claim as their IP as that idea might have come to you while on their clock. Look back at the ongoing litigation between Bratz and Mattel. When were ideas developed and in your case, where was strategy developed. All the money you might make from (B) will no doubt be spent on attorneys in the end.

I can almost guarantee you signed a do not compete contract

I guarantee 100% that there is not any form of noncompete clause in place. This is PURELY moral.

The more I think about it, the more it feels like I am cheating on a girlfriend if I go with (B)