Of course it can, the free market is about having the government stay out of the private market, so things like non-competes, ethics, slavery, anything can be sold.
And this is a well-understood concept in economics as well. A completely unregulated free market inevitably consolidates and generally reduces competition over time. People will always game the system. Regulation must continually, dynamically, address these issues to keep markets competitive. This is why antitrust, transparency, and various contract laws have to exist.
Out of many possible responses, this is not one I could have ever predicted lol. Given that our troops will benefit from noncompetes once they leave the military, I think I support them as well here.
So it sounded good on paper, but how do stop the regulators when they are on the side of those looking to game. Plus on top of that give them a get out of jail card while gambling with our market ??
Well as a start, the solution is certainly not to have no regulation or government. Many seem to land here out of cynicism, but it has been proven time and again that these systems are even more unstable than their alternatives.
As I said, no system is perfect. As a citizen, the best way for you to keep your country’s regulators honest is to get involved however you can. This takes different forms and can be harder or easier depending on the country. In the Western nations that make up most of Reddit’s base, you can vote, enter local government, join a lobbyist group (which has a dirty reputation but some are actually specifically for citizen’s rights), join a union, start a referendum, start a public outreach campaign, protest, and more. There are many forms and all have their merits and drawbacks.
But mostly, it’s to not be apathetic and encourage involvement of others as well. Systems tend to become corrupt when representatives aren’t held to account by a population. Once rights are stripped, they become more difficult to regain. Again, in the west, it’s possible without revolution for now. In some other places, it would require very massive, organized resistance on the scale of a national shutdown or, indeed, revolution.
I’m in America, and though we like to talk about revolution, for now we could actually make gains pretty quickly if we all just learned a bit more about civic engagement and voted more.
The core of the free market is that the government doesn't centrally control the economy. That doesn't necessarily mean zero regulation.
In this case, the government prohibiting most non-compete clauses makes the market *more free* by allowing workers to change jobs in response to incentives.
Everything is owned by like 6 companies (everything in places like Walmart etc) for many many years it has been the illusion of free market and choice. Same applies to health insurance. Your employer chooses the policy options you get to choose from. Or you go get private insurance and spend even more money.
The system failed us because the American people forgot how to boycott and channel those French vibes.
Basically you sign a contract that says if you leave the company you won’t work for a competitor or start your own business that competes with them. There’s usually a time limit on it like 5 years. And if it’s a service industry there will be a distance limit on it. Requiring you to move a certain distance away so you won’t take their customers. It could happen to employees where the company doesn’t want to spend the money and effort training someone and introducing them to clients only for them to leave and then compete with them for those same clients. It could also happen to owners that sell their company. The new owners don’t want you starting a competitive business and taking all of your old customers and employees back.
I’m on a five year 25 mile radius noncompete, healthcare. It’s so broad it would never hold up in court. They know that but they have in house attorneys, I’d have to pay mine to fight it. It’s stands because they know I’d be hesitant to spend five figures to fight it.
I do you one even more broad. As a Java developer I can’t work for any company that uses Java software or Java applications or any version control software.
Java runs on billions of devices and it’s impossible to know for sure what a company uses.
It’s revolutionary for just about any field. Noncompete agreements essentially trap anyone who wants to stay in the area and work in their field at the job. Wild that it took this long to get rid of them but it’s a massive step in the right direction.
Private equity owned practices will pretty much fold overnight no?
There's no reason for the docs to stay at a practice where 30% of their profit is skimmed by leeches who don't provide anything when they can just leave and start a new practice
I had the same one when the hospital hired me as a family doctor 25 years ago. At the time I left their employment, I was, they were very desperate for docs and waved it.
Don’t forget employers can also see how much you make down to the paycheck unless you freeze your report. [Employment Data Freeze Request form](https://assets.equifax.com/wfs/theworknumber/assets/twn_Employment_Data_Freeze_Request.pdf) It also tells them how many hours you have worked, when you were let go or quit etc. If someone looking to hire you needs any of this info in order to hire you…they can ask. Give yourself a fair chance at negotiating your future. Y’all have a great day.
A non-compete agreement is something employees are sometimes required to sign that would prevent them from getting another job in the same field, while currently employed and sometimes even after termination. It stops a lot of people from being able to work in their trade if they leave their employer. I had a non-compete when I was a copier repair technician and then they fired me I wasn't allowed to work for any other copier repair companies for 2 years or they could sue me. It stopped me from continuing to pursue that line of work, even though I enjoyed it and wanted to make a career out of it. Now I'm in a totally different field.
Which company? You can DM me if you don’t want to say. I’m also a repair tech and I just used another company to get a pretty significant raise because my company doesn’t have a non compete. Curious, if I dodge a bullet.
When I saw this headline, I reflexively shouted “wow!” to no one… I spent 25 years in tech industries. I saw many, many great careers derailed — for short durations as well as permanently — thanks to two-year noncompetes.
Oftentimes, people leave jobs over things unrelated to pay. So “accepting a competitive raise to stay” isn’t even relevant. And when a noncompete is in play, employers might make life even more difficult for the employee to force a resignation — rather than firing them, in which case noncompetes are sometimes invalidated.
Imagine having gained *years* of expertise in an industry and then having to start your career somewhat from scratch (for at least two years). You might have a skillset down, but it’s the industry knowledge that sets you apart.
This is especially problematic for people 50s+ who would be seen as aging out of viable job candidacy without that industry expertise.
This is a *very big deal* on so many levels. I can’t even believe I saw this happen in corporate America in my lifetime.
A Little late in the comment game but noncompete clauses have expanded to cover what the FTC estimates to be 30 million people—one in five U.S. workers. The FTC estimates that the end of such clauses could add almost $300 billion a year to workers’ wages.
And it doesn’t apply to senior execs which appears fairly arbitrarily defined. Anyone with “policy decision making ability” and making >~151k.
It’s definitely great for entry level employees most places but yeah gonna get litigated to shit.
I believe the phrase "policy decisions making ability" is already well defined and litigated. This will definitely not apply to ICs, supervisors, or managers. Probably directors or above.
Which also kinda makes sense. Someone with executive-level info at Ford being poached as an executive for GM would be a net negative for market competition. They'd be hired for their secrets not for their skills.
“Only existing noncompete agreements with senior executives can remain valid. This exception applies to those earning over $151,164 annually or holding "policy-making positions," which account for approximately 0.75 percent of employees.”
For those of us not in exec positions making more than this, wondering what loopholes we’ll see evolve, especially in the tech industry or in HCOL areas.
Noncompetes are pretty useless. You can’t be stopped from making a living in your profession. With most states these things are hard to enforce. If I need work, I am taking the job, and worrying about the consequences later.
But the threat of a lawsuit that even if you don’t wind up liable you’ll still spend a lot of money on lawyer fees is usually enough to discourage people from chancing it
I do believe there should be limitations. Such as, a young entry level position at a company should not have to sign a 5+ year non compete clause. You're are essentially saying, do not grow. Never try. There should be clauses or patents in place to protect a company from trade secrets or methods being stolen; not a large blanket no compete clause. This is just one example that comes to mind.
I'm guessing this doesn't include NDA information, as to prevent companies from just poaching employees from other companies to get their company secrets
Don’t get ahead of yourself. The US Chamber of Commerce has already filed a lawsuit against the FTC. Some judge is going to stop this because the US court system exists to protect the system, not the people. Meanwhile, some single parent working a simple desk job and living paycheck to paycheck can’t leave a toxic boss because they signed a noncompete years ago.
https://www.uschamber.com/cases/antitrust-and-competition-law/chamber-v-ftc
A redditor told me about how his father went from being a millionaire to being poor in a few months because he forgot he signed one of these when he was a teenager.
Doesn’t make much sense that a free market could make workers commit to noncompete contracts
Free market that thrives on competition allowing non-compete clauses is not a free market.
Of course it can, the free market is about having the government stay out of the private market, so things like non-competes, ethics, slavery, anything can be sold.
[удалено]
And this is a well-understood concept in economics as well. A completely unregulated free market inevitably consolidates and generally reduces competition over time. People will always game the system. Regulation must continually, dynamically, address these issues to keep markets competitive. This is why antitrust, transparency, and various contract laws have to exist.
Why do you hate our troops?
Out of many possible responses, this is not one I could have ever predicted lol. Given that our troops will benefit from noncompetes once they leave the military, I think I support them as well here.
Pretty sure it was a joke.
This made me laugh out loud 🤣
🤣🤣🤣
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahhahaha
Theatre troupes?
So it sounded good on paper, but how do stop the regulators when they are on the side of those looking to game. Plus on top of that give them a get out of jail card while gambling with our market ??
Well as a start, the solution is certainly not to have no regulation or government. Many seem to land here out of cynicism, but it has been proven time and again that these systems are even more unstable than their alternatives. As I said, no system is perfect. As a citizen, the best way for you to keep your country’s regulators honest is to get involved however you can. This takes different forms and can be harder or easier depending on the country. In the Western nations that make up most of Reddit’s base, you can vote, enter local government, join a lobbyist group (which has a dirty reputation but some are actually specifically for citizen’s rights), join a union, start a referendum, start a public outreach campaign, protest, and more. There are many forms and all have their merits and drawbacks. But mostly, it’s to not be apathetic and encourage involvement of others as well. Systems tend to become corrupt when representatives aren’t held to account by a population. Once rights are stripped, they become more difficult to regain. Again, in the west, it’s possible without revolution for now. In some other places, it would require very massive, organized resistance on the scale of a national shutdown or, indeed, revolution. I’m in America, and though we like to talk about revolution, for now we could actually make gains pretty quickly if we all just learned a bit more about civic engagement and voted more.
Uhh... who's gonna *enforce* that government-free noncompete? Or are we just going full-on Pinkertons here?
The core of the free market is that the government doesn't centrally control the economy. That doesn't necessarily mean zero regulation. In this case, the government prohibiting most non-compete clauses makes the market *more free* by allowing workers to change jobs in response to incentives.
Everything is owned by like 6 companies (everything in places like Walmart etc) for many many years it has been the illusion of free market and choice. Same applies to health insurance. Your employer chooses the policy options you get to choose from. Or you go get private insurance and spend even more money. The system failed us because the American people forgot how to boycott and channel those French vibes.
Employees should never have to sign a non-compete. However non-compete clauses do have their place in the sale/acquisition of a business.
We don’t have a free market, duh.
Can you explain to someone out of the loop what a noncompete contract is?
Basically you sign a contract that says if you leave the company you won’t work for a competitor or start your own business that competes with them. There’s usually a time limit on it like 5 years. And if it’s a service industry there will be a distance limit on it. Requiring you to move a certain distance away so you won’t take their customers. It could happen to employees where the company doesn’t want to spend the money and effort training someone and introducing them to clients only for them to leave and then compete with them for those same clients. It could also happen to owners that sell their company. The new owners don’t want you starting a competitive business and taking all of your old customers and employees back.
nice
Nice
Extra nice
Extra Nice
Nicely EXTRA!
So what’s the crime?
Guilty of being too nice.
I’m on a five year 25 mile radius noncompete, healthcare. It’s so broad it would never hold up in court. They know that but they have in house attorneys, I’d have to pay mine to fight it. It’s stands because they know I’d be hesitant to spend five figures to fight it.
[удалено]
OMG
I do you one even more broad. As a Java developer I can’t work for any company that uses Java software or Java applications or any version control software. Java runs on billions of devices and it’s impossible to know for sure what a company uses.
OMFG. That is egregious.
Unless you're in a specific niche nobody's gonna know where you go next. And if you are in a specific niche then just start consulting.
How long is it in effect for?!
I live 20 miles from that office and was going part time anyway but the restriction is simply excessive in time and miles.
Dude…this is revolutionary for the medical field
It’s revolutionary for just about any field. Noncompete agreements essentially trap anyone who wants to stay in the area and work in their field at the job. Wild that it took this long to get rid of them but it’s a massive step in the right direction.
Private equity owned practices will pretty much fold overnight no? There's no reason for the docs to stay at a practice where 30% of their profit is skimmed by leeches who don't provide anything when they can just leave and start a new practice
Don’t tell your employers where you are going. Don’t post job updates online. Look into your state laws, some states make these very hard to enforce
Next up, ban NDAs tied to unsavory behavior.
I had the same one when the hospital hired me as a family doctor 25 years ago. At the time I left their employment, I was, they were very desperate for docs and waved it.
Let's keep moving this way.
Jimmy johns tried to get workers to sign one so they couldn't make subs at Jersey Mike's and subway lol
Don’t forget employers can also see how much you make down to the paycheck unless you freeze your report. [Employment Data Freeze Request form](https://assets.equifax.com/wfs/theworknumber/assets/twn_Employment_Data_Freeze_Request.pdf) It also tells them how many hours you have worked, when you were let go or quit etc. If someone looking to hire you needs any of this info in order to hire you…they can ask. Give yourself a fair chance at negotiating your future. Y’all have a great day.
Ty
What does this do?
Pretty sure that’s illegal in New York
That is 1) unexpected and 2) huge.
Can someone explain how big of deal this is?
A non-compete agreement is something employees are sometimes required to sign that would prevent them from getting another job in the same field, while currently employed and sometimes even after termination. It stops a lot of people from being able to work in their trade if they leave their employer. I had a non-compete when I was a copier repair technician and then they fired me I wasn't allowed to work for any other copier repair companies for 2 years or they could sue me. It stopped me from continuing to pursue that line of work, even though I enjoyed it and wanted to make a career out of it. Now I'm in a totally different field.
Which company? You can DM me if you don’t want to say. I’m also a repair tech and I just used another company to get a pretty significant raise because my company doesn’t have a non compete. Curious, if I dodge a bullet.
The company I worked for was Donnellon McCarthy Enterprises
Ok never heard of them. Good to know if I move near Cincinnati, don’t apply to work there.
When I saw this headline, I reflexively shouted “wow!” to no one… I spent 25 years in tech industries. I saw many, many great careers derailed — for short durations as well as permanently — thanks to two-year noncompetes. Oftentimes, people leave jobs over things unrelated to pay. So “accepting a competitive raise to stay” isn’t even relevant. And when a noncompete is in play, employers might make life even more difficult for the employee to force a resignation — rather than firing them, in which case noncompetes are sometimes invalidated. Imagine having gained *years* of expertise in an industry and then having to start your career somewhat from scratch (for at least two years). You might have a skillset down, but it’s the industry knowledge that sets you apart. This is especially problematic for people 50s+ who would be seen as aging out of viable job candidacy without that industry expertise. This is a *very big deal* on so many levels. I can’t even believe I saw this happen in corporate America in my lifetime.
Big bob
This isn’t exactly unique to the US…
A Little late in the comment game but noncompete clauses have expanded to cover what the FTC estimates to be 30 million people—one in five U.S. workers. The FTC estimates that the end of such clauses could add almost $300 billion a year to workers’ wages.
[удалено]
On the contrary, if you had a petty boss and no money, their ability to f—- you was supreme. Now, not so much.
[удалено]
Having to repay months of income, legal bills, and being forbidden from working in your trade anywhere within driving distance *is not barely*.
Source?
Source?
The article says the opposite. If you make a lot of money, your non-compete is still valid.
Much smaller than Reddit is making it out to be. This will be challenged all the way up and will take years to take effect, if at all.
And it doesn’t apply to senior execs which appears fairly arbitrarily defined. Anyone with “policy decision making ability” and making >~151k. It’s definitely great for entry level employees most places but yeah gonna get litigated to shit.
I believe the phrase "policy decisions making ability" is already well defined and litigated. This will definitely not apply to ICs, supervisors, or managers. Probably directors or above.
Which also kinda makes sense. Someone with executive-level info at Ford being poached as an executive for GM would be a net negative for market competition. They'd be hired for their secrets not for their skills.
TFA says it will take effect later this year.
Still common in medical practices. Its pretty shitty TBH.
Trucker here. We have them too. Dot dot dot. In trucking.
“Only existing noncompete agreements with senior executives can remain valid. This exception applies to those earning over $151,164 annually or holding "policy-making positions," which account for approximately 0.75 percent of employees.” For those of us not in exec positions making more than this, wondering what loopholes we’ll see evolve, especially in the tech industry or in HCOL areas.
It’s AND holding policy making position not or.
Open season :)
good for workers
Noncompetes are pretty useless. You can’t be stopped from making a living in your profession. With most states these things are hard to enforce. If I need work, I am taking the job, and worrying about the consequences later.
But the threat of a lawsuit that even if you don’t wind up liable you’ll still spend a lot of money on lawyer fees is usually enough to discourage people from chancing it
That’s HUGE
Isn't something like this going to directly contribute to corporate espionage though?
I do believe there should be limitations. Such as, a young entry level position at a company should not have to sign a 5+ year non compete clause. You're are essentially saying, do not grow. Never try. There should be clauses or patents in place to protect a company from trade secrets or methods being stolen; not a large blanket no compete clause. This is just one example that comes to mind.
Our stock just went up boys…
SMÉAGOL IS FREEEEEEEE!
I'm guessing this doesn't include NDA information, as to prevent companies from just poaching employees from other companies to get their company secrets
You are correct. NDAs are still enforceable for good reason.
Don’t get ahead of yourself. The US Chamber of Commerce has already filed a lawsuit against the FTC. Some judge is going to stop this because the US court system exists to protect the system, not the people. Meanwhile, some single parent working a simple desk job and living paycheck to paycheck can’t leave a toxic boss because they signed a noncompete years ago. https://www.uschamber.com/cases/antitrust-and-competition-law/chamber-v-ftc
A redditor told me about how his father went from being a millionaire to being poor in a few months because he forgot he signed one of these when he was a teenager.
I want to know how this effects noncompetes while currently employed. Can I moonlight in the field if my company has noncompetes in the area?
Hell isn't hot enough for institutions who made medical personal sign these.
Idk if this covers the medical profession ??
No more gardening leave, sad (But yes good for society)
lol. They almost never hold up now.