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 In fact, employers will be required to inform employees with existing agreements that they are no longer valid.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.
- Senior Attorney
An attorney 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
Subscribe
RSSTopics
- Employment Liability
- Labor Law
- Department of Labor (DOL)
- Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
- Employment Agreement
- At Will Employment
- Wage & Hour
- Employment Discrimination
- Minimum Wage
- National Labor Relations Act
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
- Human Resources
- Noncompete Agreements
- Civil Rights
- National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)
- Contract Employees
- COVID-19
- Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)
- National Labor Relations Board
- Coronavirus
- Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
- Tax Law
- Whistleblower Protection Act
- Regulatory Law
- Paid Medical Leave Act (PMLA)
- Federal Trade Commission
- OSHA Issues
- Title VII
- Civil Litigation
- Settlements
- Retaliation
- Sick Leave
- Unemployment Benefits
- Workplace Harassment
- Contracts
- Transgender Issues
- Accommodations
- First Amendment
- Hostile Work Environment
- Business Risk Management
- Public Education
- ERISA
- Workers' Compensation
- Cannabis
- Department of Justice
- Medicare Issues
- LGBTQ
- Class Actions
- 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
- Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)
- Diversity
- Union Organizing & Relations
Recent Updates
- Federal Court Throws out DOL’s Attempt to Rewrite White Collar Overtime Rules
- Civil Rights Litigation Filed by Christian Employers Gets New Life Following Federal Appellate Court Ruling
- Michigan Supreme Court Clarifies Minimum Wage Decision
- Judge Strikes Down Federal Ban on Non-compete Agreements
- Michigan Employers Can Legally Resist Union Organizing Efforts
- Michigan Supreme Court Decision Reinstates Previous Versions of Wage Laws
- Union Power in Michigan: Is it Real or Imagined?
- Employers Should act Now to Address Rising DOL Salary Thresholds for Exempt Employees
- Is This the end of the Employee Non-Compete Clause?
- Tax Considerations When Settling an Employment Claim 2.0