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

31–36 of 36 posts

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

#31

Post by curioussavage »

jrockway wrote: post #12
lupire wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incorrect, due to COBRA https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ebsa/laws-and-regulations/laws/...

Do people actually sign up for COBRA? Last time I quit a job it was like $3000/month. I took my chances instead.

Only stupid people like me. I paid tens of thousands for cobra coverage. Never again.

Nearly ruined me

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

#32

Post by relistan »

lupire wrote: post #10
filoleg wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/...

Most people off work can’t afford COBRA because the full cost of US health care is so high. COBRA: Nice idea, but useless in practice.

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

#33

Post by nfriedly »

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?

Yeah, it was meant to clarify the title, but it looks like the title got changed after I posted that.

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

#34

Post by omgwtfbyobbq »

inferiorhuman wrote: post #23
omgwtfbyobbq wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

COBRA is almost universally more expensive for individuals because they have to pay both their premium and whatever premium the company was paying.

The cost of COBRA is whatever your plan's premium was plus an optional 2% administrative fee. So yeah, you're not getting your employer's subsidy but you're not paying two premiums.

That's only if the company chooses to continue paying your premiums, and I've never seen that after leaving a job.

I'm my experience, you'll pay 1.5-3x what you were paying while with the company.

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

#35

Post by alistairSH »

inferiorhuman wrote: post #23
omgwtfbyobbq wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

COBRA is almost universally more expensive for individuals because they have to pay both their premium and whatever premium the company was paying.

The cost of COBRA is whatever your plan's premium was plus an optional 2% administrative fee. So yeah, you're not getting your employer's subsidy but you're not paying two premiums.

Employer gets to pay with pre-tax dollars. The ex-employee does not. So, for most of us, that’s a ~30% increase in cost for the amount the employer previously covered.

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

#36

Post by alistairSH »

curioussavage wrote: post #31
jrockway wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do people actually sign up for COBRA? Last time I quit a job it was like $3000/month. I took my chances instead.

Only stupid people like me. I paid tens of thousands for cobra coverage. Never again. Nearly ruined me

What’s your other option? Are equivalent plans on the health care marketplace any less expensive? Or, would you go without? The latter might work ok if you’re young, single, and don’t have much to lose. For a parent, with a mortgage, and a spouse, and whatever else, that’s a giant risk to take.
Post reply on HN