Blumenthal To Widen Scope Of Bill

Blumenthal To Widen Scope Of Bill

There are 5 comments on the Hartford Courant story from Feb 20, 2007, titled Blumenthal To Widen Scope Of Bill. In it, Hartford Courant reports that:

Urges Law Barring Non-Competes Unless Employees Possess Trade Secrets February 21, 2007 By ERIC GERSHON , Courant Staff Writer Attorney General Richard Blumenthal had security guards in mind, at first.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Hartford Courant.

Charlie Saytanides

Stevenson, CT

#1 Feb 21, 2007
I agree with a ban on noncompete agreements. I am currently in a battle with my employer over a very broad agreement that effectively prohibits me from working in insurance in CT for one year. If I don't sign "as is" I am subject to termination.
Peter T Szymonik

Manchester, CT

#2 Feb 22, 2007
This bill is long overdue.

For almost two years I've been legally harassed by a former employer who has sought to ruin my career and put my new startup company out of business.

They've done this by abusing the state court system and hauling a five-year old and completely dated non-compete out of the trash can and using it against me.

This non-compete doesn't even apply to what my former employer or I do today. They're doing this to cover up their own misdeeds, their wrongful termination of my employment and to silence me about their own glaring business malfeasance which I exposed as a Sarbanes-Oxley whistleblower.

This bill must pass to prevent this kind of legal terrorism and de facto slavery from happening in our state in the future.

These non-compete agreements do nothing but tie up our state courts with worthless cases. Corporations do not use these non-compete agreements to protect themselves or their interests.

Rather, they abuse them to harass former employees and to prevent their existing employees from speaking out when they witness corporate wrong doing.

It's time for Connecticut to follow the lead of California and Florida and ban these absurd agreements. Corporations who wish to protect their intellectual property can do so just as effectively with simple confidentiality agreements.
You are an idiot Peter

United States

#3 Mar 12, 2007
You have been fired at least 3 times in the last 8 years! Even though you are always right, everyone you worked for is incompetent and out to get you. Why isn't anyone going to jail at your last company that you "blew the whistle on"? Why haven't you counter sued and won? Why don't you just focus on keeping a job for more than 24 months and not leaving a trail of angy and disapointed people. I can't help but think that this is not good for your wife and two kids, do you?
Peter T Szymonik wrote:
This bill is long overdue.
For almost two years I've been legally harassed by a former employer who has sought to ruin my career and put my new startup company out of business.
They've done this by abusing the state court system and hauling a five-year old and completely dated non-compete out of the trash can and using it against me.
This non-compete doesn't even apply to what my former employer or I do today. They're doing this to cover up their own misdeeds, their wrongful termination of my employment and to silence me about their own glaring business malfeasance which I exposed as a Sarbanes-Oxley whistleblower.
This bill must pass to prevent this kind of legal terrorism and de facto slavery from happening in our state in the future.
These non-compete agreements do nothing but tie up our state courts with worthless cases. Corporations do not use these non-compete agreements to protect themselves or their interests.
Rather, they abuse them to harass former employees and to prevent their existing employees from speaking out when they witness corporate wrong doing.
It's time for Connecticut to follow the lead of California and Florida and ban these absurd agreements. Corporations who wish to protect their intellectual property can do so just as effectively with simple confidentiality agreements.
Yasmen Nartherfeeth

Cranberry Twp, PA

#4 Jul 30, 2007
First of all, Calling someone an idiot in an open forum is rude and uneccessary. I can't help but think the person who posted this message is an employee of Peter's former company with sour grapes because the company is crumbling around them as a consequence of Peter's relevations.
Read-the-Court-t ranscript

Glastonbury, CT

#5 Aug 20, 2012
Mr. Szymonik has been fired numerous times since the 1990's. Yasmen read the transcripts of the case TyMetrix vs. Szymonik which are readily available to the public, especially 2007.
You'll see Mr. Szymonik and was found to have created secret accounts allowing him access to highly confidential information,TyMetrix's servers, private emails when off premises, his COO's notebook hardrive, and intellectual property not belonging to him but his former company.
He was found in contempt and no one disputes the intellectual property and other nefarious behaviors of Mr. Szymonik. Read Mr. Szymonik's testimony and how he justifies having such property. Court transcripts don't lie nor do they slander or libel.
However if the the major corporations/clients of TyMetrix were properly notified of the breech in security from 2005-07 is a whole different issue.
The company has far from crumbled and is fact thriving. Do your legal research before you post.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Beverages Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Gay groups seek to buy NYC church known for hat... 6 hr WasteWater 10
News Dow Jones Industrial Average Falling Today on C... Jan 18 Ritual Habitual 1
News Sandy Miller (Nov '09) Dec '15 jim 13
News UnitedHealth CEO terms ACA exchange growth a 'b... Dec '15 Elise 1
News Amusement Park Sued Over Lonely, Cigarette-Smok... Nov '15 Sneaky Pete 1
News Soda tax hearings bubble over with debate Sep '15 Tuck Faxes 11
News Soda pop industry pumps $100 million into defea... Sep '15 Simple Solution 1
More from around the web