Started By
Message

re: Non-Compete agreements are now illegal nationwide!

Posted on 4/23/24 at 2:17 pm to
Posted by CatfishJohn
Member since Jun 2020
14882 posts
Posted on 4/23/24 at 2:17 pm to
The juice isn't worth the legal cost in 99% of the situations anyway. And they were toothless in most states already.

But yes, this is pretty big news.

I'm on the fence on these. If you sign it, you sign it, why is the government involved? Are they going to void clauses in professional sports contracts that state players can't be traded to division foes, etc.?
Posted by Shexter
Prairieville
Member since Feb 2014
14931 posts
Posted on 4/23/24 at 2:20 pm to
quote:

If you sign it, you sign it, why is the government involved?


Is not signing it really an option if you want the job?

quote:

link?


https://thehill.com/business/4615452-ftc-votes-to-ban-non-compete-agreements/
This post was edited on 4/23/24 at 2:24 pm
Posted by KemoSabe65
70605
Member since Mar 2018
5466 posts
Posted on 4/23/24 at 2:32 pm to
Signed one 10/2007 and left on 8/2022, back in business 4/2024. It never met the qualifications in La and now I have been served. It just paper for the time being but this ruling just makes it easier to continue being my clients back to the fold.
FTSC’s
Posted by Bjorn Cyborg
Member since Sep 2016
28511 posts
Posted on 4/23/24 at 2:37 pm to
quote:

Are they going to void clauses in professional sports contracts that state players can't be traded to division foes, etc.?


That's a collectively bargained union contract. Completely different situation.
Posted by PGAOLDBawNeVaBroke
Member since Dec 2023
1051 posts
Posted on 4/23/24 at 3:03 pm to
The problem is even if they aren’t enforceable, new employers don’t want the hassle. That’s market interference.

By default they say, wait it out. It causes a whole host of problems and should be done anyway with in nearly all situations.
This post was edited on 4/23/24 at 7:37 pm
Posted by moneyg
Member since Jun 2006
57556 posts
Posted on 4/23/24 at 3:21 pm to
quote:

I'm on the fence on these


#1, A federal agency shouldn't be changing law on its own without congress passing a law.

#1a, the Federal government shouldn't get in the middle of a contract between two parties.
Posted by NYNolaguy1
Member since May 2011
21157 posts
Posted on 4/23/24 at 7:06 pm to
quote:

'm on the fence on these. If you sign it, you sign it, why is the government involved?


Unless the employee is adequately compensated for these (which almost never happens) it's at the detriment to the employee.

It doesn't serve any business except to limit competition in the market place. Why are we in favor of this again?
Posted by salty1
Member since Jun 2015
4546 posts
Posted on 4/23/24 at 9:54 pm to
I wonder how they’ll view “non-solicitations”. I say throw those out also.
Posted by PikesPeak
The Penalty Box
Member since Apr 2022
660 posts
Posted on 4/24/24 at 11:02 am to
Non compete basically removes a person’s ability to work in their particular field.

A football player can’t go to a division rival, but that doesn’t mean they’re removing their ability to play football entirely. There’s a difference.
Posted by Pikes Peak Tiger
Colorado Springs
Member since Jun 2023
5288 posts
Posted on 4/26/24 at 7:30 pm to
quote:

If you sign it, you sign it


I get that and it is a valid point. But the flip side is that the person being offered the job really doesn’t have a choice. Sign the non-compete or we hire someone else.

And in fields where non-competes are common, it’s not like there is often a backup job that won’t make you sign.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram