For employers out there who have fretted and even agonized over whether your non-compete agreements have the right scope and duration to pass legal muster, your worries may be over – because soon you may not be able to require a non-compete agreement at all.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has issued a final rule determining that non-compete clauses constitute an unfair method of competition under the Federal Trade Commission Act. The new FTC rule imposes a comprehensive ban on new non-compete agreements and renders existing agreements unenforceable as of the rule’s effective date (120 days after publication in the Federal Register). In fact, employers will be required to inform employees with existing agreements that they are no longer valid.
There is a limited carve-out for “senior executives” with existing agreements. “Senior executives” are those individuals who are earning more than $151,164 and are in “policy-making position.” The FTC estimates that this is fewer than 1% of workers. The rule also does not apply to agreements entered into pursuant to a legitimate sale of a business entity or causes of action accruing before the rule’s effective date.
The rule has not yet been published and legal challenges are certainly anticipated, but employers are encouraged to take steps now to protect client information and other trade secrets by means of existing laws, non-disclosure agreements, patents or other legal means.
This is also a good time to review the non-compete issue with legal counsel to ensure your organization is best positioned should the final rule pass what is expected to be intense legal scrutiny and potential challenges in court.
- Partner
A partner in the firm’s Flint office, Rhonda R. Stowers has an extensive litigation practice that includes general liability, governmental law, commercial liability, transportation law and real estate.
Ms. Stowers has ...
Add a comment
Topics
- Employment Liability
- Labor Law
- Department of Labor (DOL)
- Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
- Employment Discrimination
- Employment Agreement
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
- Human Resources
- Wage & Hour
- Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
- National Labor Relations Act
- At Will Employment
- Minimum Wage
- Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
- COVID-19
- National Labor Relations Board
- Coronavirus
- Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)
- Noncompete Agreements
- No Tax on Overtime
- Overtime
- Payroll
- National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)
- Arbitration
- Whistleblower Protection Act
- Civil Rights
- Regulatory Law
- Contract Employees
- Title VII
- Paid Medical Leave Act (PMLA)
- Sick Leave
- Tax Law
- Workplace Harassment
- Earned Sick Time
- Retaliation
- Transgender Issues
- OSHA Issues
- Contracts
- Unemployment Benefits
- Federal Trade Commission
- Business Risk Management
- Hostile Work Environment
- Civil Litigation
- Settlements
- ERISA
- Workers' Compensation
- Accommodations
- Cannabis
- Public Education
- LGBTQ
- Class Actions
- Department of Justice
- Medicare Issues
- Sexual Harassment
- Garnishments
- Social Media
- Retail Liability
- RICO
- Emergency Information
- Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA)
- Department of Education (DOE)
- Title IX
- Medical Marijuana
- Right to Work
- Union Organizing & Relations
Recent Updates
- Department of Labor Proposes Rule Altering Joint Employer Analysis
- Federal Policy Favors Arbitration but Poor Drafting Derails Enforcement
- An Employers Guide to New OBBBA Overtime Reporting Requirements
- Federal Court Rules State Discrimination Claims Subject to Mandatory Arbitration
- Are Boilerplate Terms in Employment Applications Enforceable?
- Is Your Business Ready for Pay Transparency Laws?
- Supreme Court Resolves Circuit Split in Reverse Discrimination Cases
- Michigan Legislature Avoids Chaos by Amending Earned Sick Time Act Just Prior to Deadline
- Implementing the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act: Key Insights for Employers
- Federal Court Throws out DOL’s Attempt to Rewrite White Collar Overtime Rules





