Companies that do now allow you to work other MLMs

[DeborahDeGrande]

I asked this some time ago but I don't remember which forum I posted it on as it was quite some time ago.

I want to ask, How many of you here would join a company that clearly states in their policies and procedures you are not allowed to be involved in another MLM company even if it was a non competitive product line.

Example: You are involved in a jewelry MLM and want to join a health and wellness MLM.

This topic came to mind because I was discussing this with a friend last week who is looking for another company to ADD ON ( not leave) and one of their criteria was that a company must allow you to work another MLM business.

In doing their search and contacting companies directly some companies clearly
did not allow it, some companies allowed it UNTIL
you reached a certain level and some companies allowed it no problem.

I completely understand the independent distributors viewpoint who would be against such a clause but I also understand the companies side as well due to mass cross recruiting, downline raiding etc... which can also hurt the company.
Take a popular BIG HITTER in any company that has a huge following and they leave and many follow them elsewhere.
The company just lost a good chunk of volume. We have all seen that happen in various companies.

So, if you REALLY liked a company, the products, comp plan etc... would you join if you knew you were not allowed to work any other MLM? What if you already have a good income coming in from a former MLM company?
This could be "sticky' later on if your new company found out.

For those who build multiple companies this is no issue. They will either join, just do it and not care about what MAY happen or they will flat out refuse to join a company that does not allow you to work other companies because they are VERY independent and do not want to be told what they can or cannot do as an entrepeneur.

For those who work ONLY one company I would think that most of them would not care and such a policy would not deter them as they do not try to ride two horses at a time anyway ( common phrase in the industry and not meant to be offensive)

Curious how many see this.

It's nice to jump into some discussion. It's been a while for me as I have been real busy.

Thanks

Deb

[Robin van der Merwe]

Deb,
I'm going to expand your question just a bit by adding that many of the newer policy updates now include some nearly hidden clauses that forbid distributors from working for another company for up to 12 months after the distributor quits the first company....... It's usually worded something like not allowing your name or likeness to be used in the promotion of another company or product... (and for those who think a company wouldn't go after you if you did, I have a few stories I could share.....).

I wouldn't mind the competing, multiple company clause since I tend to be a one-at-a-time kind of gal.... but I have HUGE issues with the "12-month-sit-the-bench" clauses.


Just my two cents for the afternoon.....
Robin

[DeborahDeGrande]

Originally Posted by Robin van der Merwe

Deb,
I'm going to expand your question just a bit by adding that many of the newer policy updates now include some nearly hidden clauses that forbid distributors from working for another company for up to 12 months after the distributor quits the first company....... It's usually worded something like not allowing your name or likeness to be used in the promotion of another company or product... (and for those who think a company wouldn't go after you if you did, I have a few stories I could share.....).

I wouldn't mind the competing, multiple company clause since I tend to be a one-at-a-time kind of gal.... but I have HUGE issues with the "12-month-sit-the-bench" clauses.


Just my two cents for the afternoon.....
Robin

Wow Robin thanks.

I had no idea about THAT type of clause, I mean I had no idea it was that common!

Now that I am against!

Once I quit I am FREE to choose any company I wish as far as I'm concerned!

[Yuliya Mironova]

Originally Posted by DeborahDeGrande

I want to ask, How many of you here would join a company that clearly states in their policies and procedures you are not allowed to be involved in another MLM company even if it was a non competitive product line.

My instinctive reactions to it would be:-

(i) It's an unreasonable term;

(ii) It's not legal ("in restraint of trade") and would never be upheld by a European court, anyway, and has been put in there as a deterrent (and will work well as one because nobody will test it in court, probably).

That said, I wouldn't dream of sponsoring anyone who was also in another company, and I do my utmost to get that duplicated throughout my downline and so do all the top distributors in our company.

Our company has no such restriction, but our distributors do. The successful groups, anyway.

But, to answer your question, I think it probably wouldn't stop me from joining if I really wanted to.

I do understand a company wanting to try to ensure that they don't have distributors in other companies as well because of all the downsides to this (as discussed here so repeatedly over the years!). And I do actually think that "wrong" though it is, and "illegal" though it probably is (maybe not "over there"), they'll do well by having that "rule".

Originally Posted by DeborahDeGrande

For those who work ONLY one company I would think that most of them would not care and such a policy would not deter them as they do not try to ride two horses at a time anyway ( common phrase in the industry and not meant to be offensive)

That's not really quite my position. Well, it is in so far as it makes no difference to me because I won't work 2 companies at the same time anyway. But my real issue here is that I don't want anyone in my downline doing that either. Which is actually surprisingly easy to manage reasonably successfully, if you choose to make it part of your "downline culture" and ensure that everyone willing to listen understands the reasons for it. So I'd rather have it as "unofficial distributor policy" (we're all free to decide whom we spend our time sponsoring, training and supporting, after all, and in our case we're very selective over whom we'll sponsor) rather than "formal company policy".

[Craig Mattice]

I would love to add tremendously to this subject discussion, but I think I will simply cop out by stating, ditto what Yuliya said!

I believe there is a MAJOR conflict in the legal and tax implications to companies that flies in the face of using the contracted term, "Independent Contractor."

Akin to "Freedom of Speech," as long as you say what we approve during and post contract period for 12 months.

Deb, Robin and Yuliya, contract/agreement analysis is becoming a supreme priority in deciding on which company to associate. So much more so than at any previous time in the business.

Prospects Beware and Be Aware!

[DeborahDeGrande]

Originally Posted by Yuliya Mironova

My instinctive reactions to it would be:-

(i) It's an unreasonable term;

(ii) It's not legal ("in restraint of trade") and would never be upheld by a European court, anyway, and has been put in there as a deterrent (and will work well as one because nobody will test it in court, probably).

Yup.

That is the issue as well. As far as I know it is NOT legal here either to have such a clause as we are independent but who will try to dispute it? The companies have the upper hand here and if you don't like it? Deal with it or find another company is what they will tell you.

Deb

[DebraFerrie]

Hey there Deb!
Great topic.......:-)
So, the company I am with says we can be with another company which is great by me since I DO believe in multiple streams income as you know. Firmly believe and love it.

My problem recently was that I am looking to join a second company, in the health and nutrition field and the one I wanted has a clause you CANNOT be with another company once you reach a certain level. I just don't like them telling ME what I can and cannot do. Never liked anyone telling me what I can or cannot do, ask my parents!!! LOL

SO I either join and wing it, see what happens but keep my focus on my main candle biz....or I keep looking........but I think I've just about looked at everything out there......

I'm curious if they would ever change policies though or how strict they are about it.

[Yuliya Mironova]

Originally Posted by Debra F

I DO believe in multiple streams income

So do I. Absolutely. Great believer in it.

As long as only one of them is an MLM stream of income.

If I were looking for an MLM opportunity, there's no way I'd be willing to be sponsored by someone working two MLM businesses. Imagine how I'd feel if any of my future downline mysteriously ended up spending their time/effort/energy working in my sponsor's other business instead of in mine, as has happened to so many people in the past - including many WAHM's who've commented about it right here. (I know you wouldn't do that, Debra - I'm generalising!).

Mind you, I'd be interested to hear such a potential sponsor's answer to the question "What is it about this business opportunity into which you want to sponsor me that compels you to work in another MLM business at the same time and not be committed full-time to this one?" Somehow "multiple streams of income" just wouldn't cut it with me, I'm afraid.

[charmed]

I have a feeling that if courts were involved the requirement of an Independent contractor to not join another company could be a problem, like someone said.. there is a very fine line between a an Independent Contractor, and an employee for the tax man.

I see nothing wrong with being in two noncompeting MLM companies if you think you can be successful.

My reasons are that my parents were very successful in Fashion Two Twenty, an MLM. Then one day it was sold, somehow, and all the distributors were pushed out. They lost EVERYTHING.

Being involved in two noncompeting MLMS can help lesson the possibility of this issue ruining your life.

[DebraFerrie]

Originally Posted by charmed

My reasons are that my parents were very successful in Fashion Two Twenty, an MLM. Then one day it was sold, somehow, and all the distributors were pushed out. They lost EVERYTHING.

Being involved in two noncompeting MLMS can help lesson the possibility of this issue ruining your life.

I hear that too often and it is scary especially if it is someone's main line of income and they worked hard to build that business.
Sad
but not uncommon