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

U.S. moves to bar noncompete agreements in labor contracts

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–514 of 514 posts

Re: U.S. moves to bar noncompete agreements in labor contracts

#511

Post by hn_go_brrrrr »

22SAS wrote: post #505
humanistbot wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That might even be criminal. Careful with that word. Non-competes are non-enforceable in California and other jurisdictions. Some people say "non-competes are illegal in California", but it is not a crime to ask someone to sign a contract with a non-enforceable provision.

One of the best quant firms, TGS, is located in CA and enforces non-competes no problem. They had an employee sue, his NC got waived but he had to pay 7-figures to TGS.

In lawyer's fees or in damages?

Re: U.S. moves to bar noncompete agreements in labor contracts

#512

Post by thwayunion »

bcaine wrote: post #152
thwayunion wrote: post #139

IMO the link should be changed to the FTC's press release, which has no paywall and provides a better summary: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/01/... You can read the proposed rule and the full notice and factsheet here: https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/federal-register-no... Of note, an FTC commissioner (Trump appointee, so a minority voice in the executive atm) released a dissenting…

Do you know how to publicly comment? I couldn't find a way on the press release or their website.

Hey! Hopefully you go back and read comments on old posts, since the public comment period has begun and comments can now be submitted on regulations.gov:

https://www.regulations.gov/document/FTC-2023-0007-0001/comm...

Re: U.S. moves to bar noncompete agreements in labor contracts

#513

Post by MajimasEyepatch »

Spivak wrote: post #412
MajimasEyepatch wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such a bill could make it through a Democratic Congress with a large enough Senate majority. Unfortunately we don’t have that right now.

I have to believe that some, if not most, Republicans would go for a bill like this. A bill that's "freedom-from", costs nothing, is pro-worker while not being pro-labor, you get free talking points for "see you don't need unions."

It constrains the freedom of corporations, which is far more important to the Republican party than freedom of individuals.

Re: U.S. moves to bar noncompete agreements in labor contracts

#514

Post by cataphract »

gnopgnip wrote: post #224
cataphract wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

That isn’t how it works with non competes. The old employer threatens to sue the new employer unless they fire you.

You can enforce non competes in arbitration. And arbitration awards cannot be put aside just because the arbitrators got the law wrong.
Post reply on HN