Skip to main content

What I've Been Reading This Week: Non-Compete Edition


Non-compete agreements have become one of the emerging employment law topics as of late, as I have started to come across more and more articles on the matter.  In fact, an in depth analysis of a Nevada Supreme Court case from earlier this year was especially thought provoking and one that lead me to want to dedicate this post solely to this topic.  Even for the casual reader who does not come across non-competes often, there are a couple articles here that I think are worth a review.

As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week.


Jimmy John's to Pay Illinois AG $100,000 Over Use of Non-Competes for Hourly Employees

Samantha Bomkampt at The Chicago Tribune wrote an article earlier this month in regard to Jimmy John's agreeing to pay $100,000 and notify all current and former employees that it would not enforce their non-compete agreements.  Readers might remember that controversy had arisen last year when it became known that Jimmy John's had non-compete agreements with its sandwich makers (and hourly employees) that prohibited them from working for a competitor for two years following employment at Jimmy John's.  The Illinois Attorney General subsequently brought suit against Jimmy John's on the grounds that the non-competes were "highly restrictive".  I would certainly call this outcome a favorable result for those who opposed the use of non-competes for these hourly workers.


Employers Take Note: Non-Compete Reform Is On the Horizon

It should not come as much of a surprise that non-compete reform is one of the hotter employment law related topics as of late (along with the minimum wage fight).  Sarah DeFranco notes that Illinois, Idaho, Massachusetts, and New York have all taken steps over the past year to spur changes to the enforcement of non-competes in their states...to the detriment of employers.  This article is worth a quick read for those interested in changes at the state level, as well as what could be expected in the coming year.


Nevada Supreme Court Takes Hard Line Approach to Non-Competes

Earlier this year, the Nevada Supreme Court issued its opinion in the Golden Road Motor Inn Inc. v. Islam case and held that if a non-compete is held to be unreasonable in any way, a court is to not reform or modify the agreement but instead find it wholly unenforceable.  The National Law Review has a well thought out analysis of the case and the implications of just how far reaching this decision ultimately is. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more