For some reason I jumped to hoping the title also implied that union-only anti-compete clauses in government contracting were also banned. But that was too optimistic.
U.S. moves to bar noncompete agreements in labor contracts
31–40 of 514 posts
Re: U.S. moves to bar noncompete agreements in labor contracts
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Given the hostility of the current Supreme Court to federal agencies Maybe it's overreach by federal agencies when they create their own law. There is a distinction between authorizing an agency to figure out how to get something done and letting one make new law. Dramatically limiting the power of agencies to make up their own new laws seems like a good thing.
It's good to let agencies make laws if they make good laws. It's bad to let agencies make laws if they make bad laws. The liberal obsession with process is what lets the far right make inroads everywhere, since they don't share it.
What is good law and what is bad law? This is subjective, and likely shifts with the context of the surrounding society. Law is not morality, even though it may derive from social mores. For this reason, process is crucially important to prevent tyranny.
Re: U.S. moves to bar noncompete agreements in labor contracts
#33Uncompensated non-compete clauses have been pretty much unenforceable anyway given the cost of enforcement and the actual value to the enforcer (usually less than 6 figures). It's a good step to ban these given that all they do is make people afraid to work somewhere else.
Compensated non-competes are a totally different story, and probably better to hold on to.
Re: U.S. moves to bar noncompete agreements in labor contracts
#34This is a bigger deal then the title suggests since it appears it would be retroactive and nullify existing non competes > The commission’s proposal appears to address this issue by requiring employers to withdraw existing noncompetes and to inform workers that they no longer apply. The proposal would also make it illegal for an employer to enter into a noncompete with a worker or to try to do so, or to suggest that…
> Given the hostility of the current Supreme Court to federal agencies, the pessimist in me says that this would be challenged by an employer go all the way to the supreme court and be used by them to dramatically limit the power of FTC
More likely, in the short term it will be challenged in individual arbitration and we'll never hear about it.
Re: U.S. moves to bar noncompete agreements in labor contracts
#35this seems like a really bad idea. people can just join a company, get trained, then leave. hello corporate espionage.
Noncompete != Nondisclosure
Re: U.S. moves to bar noncompete agreements in labor contracts
#36Noncompete clauses for workers is the most anti-american, anti-free-market policy anyone could pull. If workers aren't free to switch to better jobs and at the same time are left to fend off for themselves them the economic system starts to resemble feudalism.
Yes, it's always been an obvious anti-trust concern. Contracts in restraint of trade should not be enforceable.
Re: U.S. moves to bar noncompete agreements in labor contracts
#37Re: U.S. moves to bar noncompete agreements in labor contracts
#38This is obviously great for workers and competition. It's actually good for companies too, even if they are too short sighted to realize it. See: silicon valley.
Re: U.S. moves to bar noncompete agreements in labor contracts
#39I agree that noncompetes are bad, but the FTC declaring it without a congressional mandate seems deeply questionable.
The FTC believes this is part of their congressional mandate as per their interrogation of Section 5 of the FTC act[1]. If I recall correctly they were enforcing this under one legal theory previously that the Supreme Court struck down so I presume they have come up with a new legal theory.
[1] https://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/supmanual/cch/20080...
Re: U.S. moves to bar noncompete agreements in labor contracts
#40This is a bigger deal then the title suggests since it appears it would be retroactive and nullify existing non competes > The commission’s proposal appears to address this issue by requiring employers to withdraw existing noncompetes and to inform workers that they no longer apply. The proposal would also make it illegal for an employer to enter into a noncompete with a worker or to try to do so, or to suggest that…
> Given the hostility of the current Supreme Court to federal agencies Maybe it's overreach by federal agencies when they create their own law. There is a distinction between authorizing an agency to figure out how to get something done and letting one make new law. Dramatically limiting the power of agencies to make up their own new laws seems like a good thing.
This would not be a law, and an agency cannot issue laws as it goes directly against the constitution. This would be a regulation, which is specifically the purpose of Federal Agencies. It is onerous, slow, and ineffective to have congress pass small laws for every little thing that needs to be regulated. Instead Congress creates agencies with a charter defining the scope of what they have purview over, and the agency then creates regulations on what it deems fit. These can be challenged in federal court, which is specifically what I've been mentioning