• TragicNotCute
    link
    fedilink
    English
    10224 days ago

    This seems pretty big. Bans non-compete agreements and requires employers to tell employees that they are now void. Hot damn

    • @RaoulDook@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2324 days ago

      Good news. Seems like a no-brainer if you consider the Freedom of Association component of our 1st Amendment rights in the USA anyway.

  • @dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    6324 days ago

    My fiance had to move to an entirely different city in order to leave the horrible hospital she worked at but still stay in her profession because of a non-compete clause. They should have been determined unconstitutional decades ago.

    She met me when she moved to the new city, so it worked out for me I guess. Less so for her!

    • @CaptainPedantic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      1624 days ago

      While I disagree entirely with the concept of a non-compete, I can sort of understand the logic for employees who work with trade secrets and intellectual property. The only logic behind a non-compete for a hospital or any other service industry business is “fuck you”.

      I’m glad it kinda worked out for you tho.

      • @SmoothLiquidation@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1824 days ago

        Part of the reason that Silicon Valley became so big instead of some place like Boston on the east coast is that California has always banned non compete clauses for workers. This allowed for more cross talk for the workers in the area and everyone was better for it.

      • @timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        924 days ago

        Stealing IP has always been, and will remain, illegal though. Non competes in general were always solely for businesses and detrimental to workers.

      • oce 🐆
        link
        fedilink
        824 days ago

        I can sort of understand the logic for employees who work with trade secrets and intellectual property.

        Aren’t NDAs made for that?

    • @grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1424 days ago

      She met me when she moved to the new city, so it worked out for me I guess. Less so for her!

      Do we have a !suicidebywords community somewhere yet?

  • a lil bee 🐝
    link
    fedilink
    4924 days ago

    This is huge! This will increase wages for both the lower and middle class, make both employees and most employers happy, and I love the provision about not being able to make it even appear that your employees are under a non-compete. Eager to see how it survives the inevitable legal onslaught from the bigger corps, but regardless this FTC has been stellar.

  • @KamikazeRusher@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    3324 days ago

    And the Chamber of Commerce is undoubtedly going to sue in court this week to have it overturned while telling us that it’s actually pro-employee to not be able to work elsewhere because of overreaching NCAs.

    Oh wait…

    • @grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2024 days ago
      1. Ban forced arbitration/waiver of right to class-action

      2. Enforce anti-trust law

      3. Enforce the UCC/doctrine of First Sale (i.e., recognize that EULAs are invalid bunk)

    • @UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      6
      edit-2
      24 days ago

      I mean, in fairness, non-competes fuck up other businesses, too. They’re also sort of a pain to litigate, generally speaking. So bigger firms hiring people from smaller firms do see a benefit by simply clearing the deck of annoying trivial NCs.

      Less of a “working for the people” and more “performance tuning the engine of market capitalism”. Which is still more than I’ve seen from most federal agencies in a good year. So, polite golf clap

  • @Kalothar@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    2324 days ago

    This is great, they were only a way into strong arming employee retention by making them fill locked in to the company

  • @gibmiser@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    724 days ago

    Woah, is this fucking for real? Is it for all sectors? Don’t have time to read right now but this sounds like a big deal

    • @catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1624 days ago

      Everyone except existing noncompetes for senior executives.

      The commission’s final rule does not nullify existing noncompetes with senior executives, who are defined as those earning more than $151,164 a year and who hold a policy-making position.

  • Cadeillac
    link
    fedilink
    English
    324 days ago

    I am really curious as to how/if this applies to professional wrestling. I always hear lots of the wrestlers are independent contractors, but also that they have noncompetes