Skip to main content

Take Note: Do Not Forget Non-Disclosure Agreements After Employment Ends


Non-disclosure agreements are commonplace for many employers and employees, especially in high level positions and technical fields.  It goes without saying that the term of a non-disclosure often extends beyond the length of employment.  As a result, employers and employees alike often have to remain silent, not share details of their work, etc. long after the employment relationship ends.  This can spell trouble for those employees who want to disclose specific parts of their prior employment to their new employer, other employees, a reporter, etc.  

Enter Steve Bannon.  For those who do not recognize his name, he is the Executive Chairman of Breitbart News, was heavily involved in President Donald Trump’s campaign for President, and served as the White House Chief Strategist in the early days of President Trump’s administration until his departure late last year.  In his role with the campaign, he apparently signed a non-disclosure agreement which prevented him from disclosing aspects of his position and interactions with President Trump and his family.

Earlier this week, it was revealed that Bannon apparently had in depth discussions with the author of an upcoming book which delves into President Trump, his campaign, administration, and family.  Shortly after news of these discussions and upcoming book became known, President Trump’s attorneys sent Bannon a letter informing him of the apparent breach of the non-disclosure and threatened legal action.

Let us use this story as an example for employees (and employers) to remember that non-disclosure agreements are not to be taken lightly.  Quite simply, as evidenced by the situation Bannon currently finds himself in, if found to be true that he violated the non-disclosure by openly discussing ‘out of bounds’ topics with the author, Bannon could find himself in an untenable situation.  While no lawsuit has yet been filed, President Trump’s legal team could seek an injunction, attorney’s fees, and restitution, among other legal remedies, as a result of the apparent non-disclosure breach.  The same thing could happen to employees who violate a non-disclosure agreement as well.

Remember the common saying back during World War II, ‘Lose Lips Sink Ships’?  Keep that in mind next time you, as an employee, want to share confidential details about your employment, in violation of a non-disclosure agreement.  Bad things could happen if you decide to talk.  Even a private conversation may turn out to be public.  Play it safe and stay quiet...the risks hat could arise with violating a non-disclosure agreement are not worth it.



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,...
Post a Comment
Read more

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations
Post a Comment
Read more

NLRB: Former Employee Cannot Be Barred From Work Premises After Filing Wage Suit

MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC - NLRB Facts :  MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC d/b/a Grand Sierra Resort & Casino ("GSR") operated a facility that included a hotel, casino, restaurant, clubs, bars, and a pool which were all open to the general public.  Tiffany Sargent ("Sargent") was briefly employed by GSR as a "beverage supervisor" in December of 2012.  After her employment ended, Sargent continued to socialize at one of the clubs.  GSR had a long standing practice of allowing former employees to patronize its facility and did not prohibit Sargent from doing so.  In June of 2013, Sargent and another employee filed a class and collective action against GSR for alleged unpaid wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Nevada law.  In July of 2014, GSR denied Sargent access to an event at one of the clubs.  GSR followed up with a letter and stated that with the on-going litigation (from the wage suit), it decided to bar Sargent from the premises. ...
1 comment
Read more