Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FTC adopts a comprehensive ban on new noncompetes with all workers

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 36 posts

Re: FTC adopts a comprehensive ban on new noncompetes with all workers

#4

Post by adastra22 »

nfriedly wrote: post #3

"Existing noncompetes with workers other than senior executives are not enforceable after the effective date." Going forward, new no new non-competes are allowed, even for senior executives.

Isn’t that quite saying the opposite? Or are you clarifying something the article got wrong?

Re: FTC adopts a comprehensive ban on new noncompetes with all workers

#6

Post by Kerb_ »

adastra22 wrote: post #4
nfriedly wrote: post #3

"Existing noncompetes with workers other than senior executives are not enforceable after the effective date." Going forward, new no new non-competes are allowed, even for senior executives.

Isn’t that quite saying the opposite? Or are you clarifying something the article got wrong?

New non-competes will not exist for anyone, including senior executives. Existing non-competes will only exist for senior executives. Both statements are true.

From the article "For existing noncompetes, the final rule adopts a different approach for senior executives than for other workers. For senior executives, existing noncompetes can remain in force. Existing noncompetes with workers other than senior executives are not enforceable after the effective date."

Re: FTC adopts a comprehensive ban on new noncompetes with all workers

#7

Post by filoleg »

songspire3 wrote: post #5

Forgive my shortsighted thinking, but how does this lower healthcare costs? It was mentioned as a main point, but I'm not sure how banning noncompetes would impact that.

My best guess: if you want to switch jobs and you are under a non-compete, you have to wait for a period of time before starting a new job at a competitor (typically 6-12 months, fairly common in finance). During that in-between period while you are waiting for the non-compete to expire, you aren’t covered by health insurance. And not being covered by health insurance usually increases healthcare costs.

Re: FTC adopts a comprehensive ban on new noncompetes with all workers

#8

Post by burnished »

songspire3 wrote: post #5

Forgive my shortsighted thinking, but how does this lower healthcare costs? It was mentioned as a main point, but I'm not sure how banning noncompetes would impact that.

Yeah, that was a weird one. I could speculate but that claim feels enough like a non-sequitur that I would expect a justification in line even in a quick summary like this.

Re: FTC adopts a comprehensive ban on new noncompetes with all workers

#9

Post by goodluckchuck »

songspire3 wrote: post #5

Forgive my shortsighted thinking, but how does this lower healthcare costs? It was mentioned as a main point, but I'm not sure how banning noncompetes would impact that.

It sounds like noncompetes are fairly common between doctors and their practice groups. So if there’s a demand and a shortage those who can move can demand higher pay. Perhaps they think this will reduce compensation for MDs.

Re: FTC adopts a comprehensive ban on new noncompetes with all workers

#10

Post by lupire »

filoleg wrote: post #7
songspire3 wrote: post #5

Forgive my shortsighted thinking, but how does this lower healthcare costs? It was mentioned as a main point, but I'm not sure how banning noncompetes would impact that.

My best guess: if you want to switch jobs and you are under a non-compete, you have to wait for a period of time before starting a new job at a competitor (typically 6-12 months, fairly common in finance). During that in-between period while you are waiting for the non-compete to expire, you aren’t covered by health insurance. And not being covered by health insurance usually increases healthcare costs.

Incorrect, due to COBRA

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ebsa/laws-and-regulations/laws/...

Post reply on HN