Wall Street non-competes are only enforced if they pay you your base salary during the period. They can also opt to not do that and waive the non-compete, in which case you can work anywhere. I think it's ridiculous that Subway has non-competes, but with regards to the article I doubt anyone is forced to choose between working for a trading firm and starving. There also are some firms that do not do non-competes. So it's closer to voluntary than involuntary I'd say, though very few decisions are truly 100% personal choice.
> Wall Street non-competes are only enforced if they pay you your base salary during the period.
You are mixing up gardening leave with non-competes. Typically, they have both.
(Eg for a recent job, I had six months of gardening leave, when they paid my base salary, and then another six months of non-compete.)
> [...] but with regards to the article I doubt anyone is forced to choose between working for a trading firm and starving.
Indeed! We don't need welfare for well-off folks. They can fend for themselves, and we can focus limited resources on the poor (and those who want the help).
