RIP Non Compete Clause

[jry]

Well... Any thoughts on the FTC voting to ban Non Compete Clauses? It's something that they promised to do, last year. Will this be tested in Court? What other such Clauses should be canceled? Is the "Liquidated Damages" Clause that is showing up in more and more contracts of those that work in TV News the next to get the axe?
WASHINGTON, D.C. — It’s a significant ruling from the Federal Trade Commission, Chaired by Lina Khan, that could bring disruption to radio and television stations that hasn’t been experienced in generations.

The “non-compete” clause, which prevented a star talent from crossing the street for a specific period of time, has been banned. As Khan sees it, this final rule is engineered to “promote competition” and is designed to protect “the fundamental freedom of workers to change jobs, increasing innovation, and fostering new business formation.”

The Commission vote to approve the issuance of the final rule was 3-2, with Commissioners Melissa Holyoak and Andrew N. Ferguson voting “no.”

“Noncompete clauses keep wages low, suppress new ideas, and rob the American economy of dynamism, including from the more than 8,500 new startups that would be created a year once noncompetes are banned,” Khan said. “The FTC’s final rule to ban noncompetes will ensure Americans have the freedom to pursue a new job, start a new business, or bring a new idea to market.”

The FTC estimates that the final rule banning noncompetes will lead to new business formation growing by 2.7% per year, resulting in more than 8,500 additional new businesses created each year.

Further, the FTC believes the final rule is expected to result in higher earnings for workers, with estimated earnings increasing for the average worker by an additional $524 per year, and it is expected to lower health care costs by up to $194 billion over the next decade. In addition, the final rule is expected to help drive innovation, leading to an estimated average increase of 17,000 to 29,000 more patents each year for the next 10 years under the final rule.
Banning Non Competes: Good for workers, businesses, and the economy

“Noncompetes are a widespread and often exploitative practice imposing contractual conditions that prevent workers from taking a new job or starting a new business,” the Khan-led agency said on Tuesday.

[TC Talks]

Is there any talent left worth stealing?
Is there any broadcast company willing to pay higher wages to steal talent?

[Round Six]

Is there any talent left work stealing?
Is there any broadcast company willing to pay higher wages to steal talent?

I believe it will be overturned in court. And nothing to do with the broadcasting world.

I'm thinking Corporate America will make a convincing case that valuable talent, some of which are privy to trade secrets, should not be allowed to just change jobs whenever they wish.

[TC Talks]

Is there any talent left work stealing?
Is there any broadcast company willing to pay higher wages to steal talent?

I believe it will be overturned in court. And nothing to do with the broadcasting world.

I'm thinking Corporate America will make a convincing case that valuable talent, some of which are privy to trade secrets, should not be allowed to just change jobs whenever they wish.

I disagree

[moldyoldie]

All I can say is... FINALLY!

[ZenithCKLW]

"But who will think of the corporations?!" There are remedies to protect trade secrets or proprietary information, like NDA's. Employees should not be forced to make a choice between: a) working for an employer they don't want to work for anymore, b) moving to a location the previous employer doesn't operate, c) finding work in a new profession/career temporarily or permanently until the non-compete expires, or d) loss of income.

Those are crappy choices meant to trap an employee and limit someone's freedom to find other work. A person who wants to leave an employer and take their skills to another employer in the same field as their background, skillset, education, or chosen career should be able to do so with a prior employer restricting that.

[Round Six]

"But who will think of the corporations?!" There are remedies to protect trade secrets or proprietary information, like NDA's. Employees should not be forced to make a choice between: a) working for an employer they don't want to work for anymore, b) moving to a location the previous employer doesn't operate, c) finding work in a new profession/career temporarily or permanently until the non-compete expires, or d) loss of income.

Those are crappy choices meant to trap an employee and limit someone's freedom to find other work. A person who wants to leave an employer and take their skills to another employer in the same field as their background, skillset, education, or chosen career should be able to do so with a prior employer restricting that.

I don't often quote a few paragraphs. But I did to say I agree with all you say.

I'd like to add that, unlike the broadcasting industry, folks in the corporate world get offered a generous amount of money to stick around when they start eyeing the door. If you notice, the folks that leave anyway are the ones that want to do their own thing. Like a start-up.

Nothing wrong, and there is great pride, in working for yourself. Even at a loss of income.

[km1125]

Is there any talent left work stealing?
Is there any broadcast company willing to pay higher wages to steal talent?

I believe it will be overturned in court. And nothing to do with the broadcasting world.

I'm thinking Corporate America will make a convincing case that valuable talent, some of which are privy to trade secrets, should not be allowed to just change jobs whenever they wish.

No doubt this will get challenged in court and overturned, or majorly modified.

We should all be concerned when unelected bureaucrats create laws that affect the entire nation (or even an entire state). Something as major as this should have had to be debated and passed by Congress.

In many cases there is some type of compensation or other benefits in exchange for agreeing to a non-compete. That should definitely still be allowed. Not so sure that same thing applies to a fast-food joint, but I was surprised to hear they even had non-competes.

[TC Talks]

If someone wants to pay me to sit in the beach and put it in a binding contract whether I quit or get fired... That's different than some of the non-competes the rule addresses.

Most of the ways the country runs is via regulation and not legislation.

[organman95]

Even if it does go to court (which I agree that it most likely will), I don't think it will be overturned. I'm sure there are some loopholes that corporations will find to do the same thing as a non-compete.