On Aug. 20, a U.S. District Court judge in Texas struck down the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) sweeping ban on non-compete agreements, which was scheduled to go into effect on Sept. 4.
The court’s decision in Ryan LLC v. Federal Trade Commission, -- F.Supp.3d --, Case No. 3:34-CV-00986-E (N.D. Tex. Aug. 20, 2024),turned on its determination that the FTC exceeded its authority when it adopted the rule. Expanding on that conclusion, the court explained that the non-compete rule was “arbitrary and capricious” because it was “unreasonably overbroad and without a reasonable explanation.”
The FTC expressed disappointment in the court’s decision and signaled that it will continue fighting to stop what it views as restrictions that limit economic liberty and depress workers’ wages. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, meanwhile, praised the ruling as a win in what it considers a fight against the government’s micromanagement of business decisions.
Many legal observers expect the FTC to appeal the court’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. While that process unfolds, employers will need to remain mindful of the non-compete laws governing the states where they operate. In Michigan, for example, employers may enter into non-compete agreements with employees as long as the restrictions fairly protect competitive business interests and are reasonable in terms of duration, geographical area and the type of employment or line of business.
Of course, when, whether and how to use non-compete agreements are matters companies should discuss with their employment attorneys. Plunkett Cooney’s team of employment lawyers routinely assist employers with non-compete issues and will continue monitoring the FTC’s attempt to impose broad restrictions while the case plays out on appeal.
- Partner
The Leader of Plunkett Cooney's Labor & Employment Law Practice Group, Erik G. Bradberry exclusively defends the interests of employers in litigation and advises them on labor relations and workplace-related regulatory ...
Add a comment
Topics
- Employment Liability
- Labor Law
- Department of Labor (DOL)
- Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
- Employment Discrimination
- Workplace Harassment
- Employment Agreement
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
- Human Resources
- Wage & Hour
- Hostile Work Environment
- Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
- National Labor Relations Act
- Minimum Wage
- At Will Employment
- COVID-19
- Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
- Coronavirus
- National Labor Relations Board
- Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)
- Noncompete Agreements
- National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)
- No Tax on Overtime
- Overtime
- Payroll
- Whistleblower Protection Act
- Arbitration
- Regulatory Law
- Title VII
- Civil Rights
- Paid Medical Leave Act (PMLA)
- Contract Employees
- Sick Leave
- Tax Law
- Retaliation
- Transgender Issues
- OSHA Issues
- Earned Sick Time
- Contracts
- Unemployment Benefits
- Business Risk Management
- Federal Trade Commission
- Civil Litigation
- Settlements
- ERISA
- Workers' Compensation
- Accommodations
- Cannabis
- Public Education
- LGBTQ
- Class Actions
- Department of Justice
- Medicare Issues
- Garnishments
- Sexual Harassment
- 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
- Sixth Circuit Reinforces Value of Prompt Employer Action in Harassment and Retaliation Claims
- 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





