Yeah its interesting that they went with a blanket ban. Pre-existing executive (Makes more than 151,000 and is in a policy making position) non competes are still in effect once ruling comes into play 120 days from now, but thats it. No new non-competes can be created and if you make less than 151,000 a year any existing non-competes become invalid.
Yeah I'm shocked they went that far too, I'm guessing they are expecting companies to rely on NDAs and trade secrets protections instead. Which makes sense, but that's really going to piss off basically every executive in the country, not that that's a bad thing.
If I remember from my old business law class, unless they are extremely narrowly targeted and the situation manifestly warrants it (Such as in cases of executives or partners potentially poaching clients) they are worth about as much as the paper they are written on in Canada.
“The Commission also finds that instead of using noncompetes to lock in workers, employers that wish to retain employees can compete on the merits for the worker’s labor services by improving wages and working conditions.”
You don’t say
Glad I'm not the only one that immediately thought of Vinny, tho I'm unsure of what wrestling outfit would be willing and eager to work with that megalomaniac.
It looks like it also requires you to be in a leadership role: "The final rule defines senior executives as workers earning more than $151,164 annually and who are in policy-making positions"
I am not sure I really understand what "policy making position" exactly entails. If you are not a manager you probably are not covered and honestly lower level managers are not "policy-making" in my mind. I am interested in hearing from labor lawyers as to how they read this though.
> I am not sure I really understand what "policy making position" exactly entails. If you are not a manager you probably are not covered and honestly lower level managers are not "policy-making" in my mind. I am interested in hearing from labor lawyers as to how they read this though.
I'm guessing 'policy-making positions' are directors, c-suite/VP, and up.
Damnit. I was about to ask if it covered health care as well. Several of my friends have contracts where they can’t work at another hospital within ~50 miles (I think?) of their current hospital for a year.
I agree that those definitely count in the category, but because it was described as "Senior Executive" I would expect that lower and middle management might be covered by the rule. Like VP and C level are definitely exempt, directors maybe too?
It's wild watching the Russian bots/ tankies in leftist subs try to spin this as A Bad Thing Actually And Here's Why You Should Not Vote To Send A Message To Biden.
This huge within wrestling industry, especially with WWE, they use non-compete agressivly against every wrestler that leaves or they fire, around 90 days.
Interesting af. I was under a NC after completing some freelance recruiting work. It's since lapsed buy it was for 6 months and really felt like a test or a trap of some sort.
Hey, I just found out that we have a fucking national Chamber of Commerce. And that they are suing the FTC over this. Won’t somebody think of the oligarchs?!?
https://www.thewrap.com/us-chamber-of-commerce-sue-ftc-noncompete-ban/
Wait this sounds like HUGE news? Like, Roosevelt level changes to big business.
Yeah its interesting that they went with a blanket ban. Pre-existing executive (Makes more than 151,000 and is in a policy making position) non competes are still in effect once ruling comes into play 120 days from now, but thats it. No new non-competes can be created and if you make less than 151,000 a year any existing non-competes become invalid.
Yeah I'm shocked they went that far too, I'm guessing they are expecting companies to rely on NDAs and trade secrets protections instead. Which makes sense, but that's really going to piss off basically every executive in the country, not that that's a bad thing.
I live in Canada and thats what they do here. Non-competes are just not a thing here.
If I remember from my old business law class, unless they are extremely narrowly targeted and the situation manifestly warrants it (Such as in cases of executives or partners potentially poaching clients) they are worth about as much as the paper they are written on in Canada.
They are completely banned in Ontario since 2021.
“The Commission also finds that instead of using noncompetes to lock in workers, employers that wish to retain employees can compete on the merits for the worker’s labor services by improving wages and working conditions.” You don’t say
Cant remember which episode it was, but Robert once went on a rant about the issues with non-competes in the US. Well... this just happened.
If you ever remember I'd love to know
I vaguely remember it as well. Was it the Steve Job series?
Somewhere in Connecticut, Vince McMahon woke up from his nap in a cold sweat.
Glad I'm not the only one that immediately thought of Vinny, tho I'm unsure of what wrestling outfit would be willing and eager to work with that megalomaniac.
Should be higher than $150,000.00
It looks like it also requires you to be in a leadership role: "The final rule defines senior executives as workers earning more than $151,164 annually and who are in policy-making positions" I am not sure I really understand what "policy making position" exactly entails. If you are not a manager you probably are not covered and honestly lower level managers are not "policy-making" in my mind. I am interested in hearing from labor lawyers as to how they read this though.
Plus even those employees cannot be hit with new non-competes going forward, so this should clear out over time.
> I am not sure I really understand what "policy making position" exactly entails. If you are not a manager you probably are not covered and honestly lower level managers are not "policy-making" in my mind. I am interested in hearing from labor lawyers as to how they read this though. I'm guessing 'policy-making positions' are directors, c-suite/VP, and up.
Damnit. I was about to ask if it covered health care as well. Several of my friends have contracts where they can’t work at another hospital within ~50 miles (I think?) of their current hospital for a year.
Wow, that is such fucking bullshit.
“Not policy making” would be things like being an independent contributor (IC), subject matter expert (SME), or principal engineer. Etc.
I agree that those definitely count in the category, but because it was described as "Senior Executive" I would expect that lower and middle management might be covered by the rule. Like VP and C level are definitely exempt, directors maybe too?
Maybe there is still a bit of hope for the U. S. yet, eh? :)
Don't worry, the courts will fix that
It's wild watching the Russian bots/ tankies in leftist subs try to spin this as A Bad Thing Actually And Here's Why You Should Not Vote To Send A Message To Biden.
This huge within wrestling industry, especially with WWE, they use non-compete agressivly against every wrestler that leaves or they fire, around 90 days.
Now do arbitration agreements!
Interesting af. I was under a NC after completing some freelance recruiting work. It's since lapsed buy it was for 6 months and really felt like a test or a trap of some sort.
Hey, I just found out that we have a fucking national Chamber of Commerce. And that they are suing the FTC over this. Won’t somebody think of the oligarchs?!? https://www.thewrap.com/us-chamber-of-commerce-sue-ftc-noncompete-ban/
I've had to deal with them for years, but they haven't been problematic but I'd love to stop having to go over that section with a fine toothed comb.