Skip to main content

FTC Proposes Banning Non Compete Agreements Nationwide


Oh boy.  Buckle up, readers.  Last week, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) proposed a new rule that would ban non compete agreements for employees and independent contractors across the country.

As if that is not already a sweeping proposal, the FTC went one step further and proposed rescinding any non compete agreement currently in place.  That would require employers to inform current (and former) employees and any independent contractors that the non compete agreement that was currently in place was no longer in effect.

Advocates of this blanket ban on non compete agreements argue it is needed on the grounds that non compete agreements suppress wages, prohibit employment, and stymie innovation.

Now before readers start cheering (or sweating) this proposed rule, I want to caution you that it is not in place.  The next likely step will be for the FTC to open up a public comment period in which comments will be taken on the proposed rule.  Once the comment period closes, the wording of the proposed rule might be reworked.  Looking even further down the road, the FTC might then publish the proposed rule in the Federal Register after which the ban on non competes could become effective.  However, somewhere in between then and now, I would expect there to be several legal challenges to the proposed rule.

While this still has a ways to go before becoming a reality, a nationwide ban on non compete agreements is a potentially massive development.


For additional information:  https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/11/what-the-proposed-ban-on-noncompete-clauses-means-for-you.html

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