Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FTC bans noncompete agreements, making it easier for workers to quit.

---

It's also going to make it harder for them to be hired.

1 posted on 04/23/2024 12:19:32 PM PDT by CFW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: CFW

The tech companies are just going to privately collude.


2 posted on 04/23/2024 12:20:11 PM PDT by Jonty30 (He hunted a mammoth me, just because I said I was hungry. He is such a good friend. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CFW

The FTC has exceeded its constitutional authority. If it has any, that is.


3 posted on 04/23/2024 12:21:38 PM PDT by ComputerGuy (Heavily-medicated for your protection)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CFW

Noncompete agreements are another form of slavery. I’m glad they’re going away.


4 posted on 04/23/2024 12:22:44 PM PDT by wildcard_redneck (He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CFW

Many were unreasonable.

I sold a biz and the non-compete they initially asked me to sign included all North America, Central America, and the Caribbean. I laughed and said no.


6 posted on 04/23/2024 12:24:14 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CFW

Might as well get rid of them. When they go to court non-competes always lose. They’re basically meaningless.


7 posted on 04/23/2024 12:26:49 PM PDT by discostu (like a dog being shown a card trick)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CFW

They are unenforceable anyway..................


9 posted on 04/23/2024 12:41:26 PM PDT by Red Badger (Homeless veterans camp in the streets while illegals are put up in 5 Star hotels....................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CFW
"It's also going to make it harder for them to be hired."

For people with 'knowledge', it's likely to ignite a poaching frenzy... which is why the non-competes exist in the first place.

10 posted on 04/23/2024 12:43:34 PM PDT by alancarp (George Orwell was an optimist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CFW

Another regulatory overreach. This administration just loves getting sued.


11 posted on 04/23/2024 12:48:29 PM PDT by NohSpinZone (First thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CFW

They’re like the exculpatory clauses in garages saying you’re responsible for your personal possessions left inside your vehicle. They’re largely not reality.


13 posted on 04/23/2024 12:53:05 PM PDT by Freest Republican (This space for rent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CFW
A non-compete agreement, without compensation, is slavery.
A non-compete agreement, with compensation, is simply a contract.
17 posted on 04/23/2024 1:10:29 PM PDT by T.B. Yoits
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CFW

Glad to see this.


18 posted on 04/23/2024 1:10:55 PM PDT by DesertRhino (2016 Star Wars, 2020 The Empire Strikes Back, 2024... RETURN OF THE JEDI. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CFW

IF YOU DO NOT WISH TO SIGN A NON-COMPETE CLAUSE-—DO NOT TAKE THE JOB OR CONTRACT.

PERIOD

TOO MANY “WANNA-BE’S” Want to ride someone else’s coat tails.


24 posted on 04/23/2024 1:28:27 PM PDT by ridesthemiles (not giving up on TRUMP---EVER)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CFW

Seems like yet another unconstitutional interference in contract law. But that’s why the bureaucrats do it.

But this is a set up for something. I’m not sure what, yet, but I have a feeling it is about hurting Trump and Trump businesses.

Something stinks about this.


26 posted on 04/23/2024 1:37:03 PM PDT by Organic Panic (Democrats. Memories as short as Joe Biden's eyes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CFW

Enforceability of non-compete agreements is a state law issue. In Texas they are generally enforceable, subject to a reasonableness test as to area and duration.

The FTC should have no jurisdiction or legal authority to abrogate private contracts that are otherwise enforceable. Unless there is a constitutional right implicated or some other federal question, the feds have no authority to regulate this. But that won’t stop them.


29 posted on 04/23/2024 1:48:17 PM PDT by con-surf-ative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CFW

I’ve always ignored them. Not constitutional.


34 posted on 04/23/2024 2:08:31 PM PDT by Fledermaus (Is it me, or all of a sudden have the buried trolls come out on FR like cicadas? It's all noise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CFW; Brit; ransomnote

Will not affect the illegal aliens though... this only applies to tax payers and those subject the laws, the IRS, etc.

Maybe now they can start to seal the Souther Border;) Afterall, the employers have a new class of hostages. Just change a rule - SCOTUS should get right on this because something of this magnitude requires Congress to pass lesigation making a law - per the 2022 SCOTUS RULING on Agencies creating rule, laws, etc. SCOTUS stated that Congress has not been doing their jobs.

How do ordinary Americans get a class action law suit the prevents Federal Agencies from enacting rules with the force of law? SCOTUS has not shut down the Agencies so we have to constantly deal with the EPA, FTC, ATF, FBI, etc.

Time for Change. Time to make Congress do something besides give money to Ukraine.


38 posted on 04/23/2024 2:17:31 PM PDT by Jumper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CFW

“ arguing the agency lacked the jurisdiction to enact the rule and that such moves should be made in Congress.”

Sound constitutional reasoning.

Unfortunately, that ship has sailed.


39 posted on 04/23/2024 2:25:03 PM PDT by Jim Noble (Assez de mensonges et de phrases)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CFW

Why? The rule does not apply to propriety matters such as intellectual property which are rightly protected from theft. It simply means for example if you worked as a bookkeeper at Dowee,Cheatham,& Howe they can’t make you agree that you will never start your own bookkeeping business or work for another firm in that capacity.


40 posted on 04/23/2024 2:44:34 PM PDT by lastchance (Cognovit Dominus qui sunt eius.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CFW

“ It’s also going to make it harder for them to be hired.”
**********************************************

Depending upon what they were working on in their previous company, CHICOM SUBSIDIARIES in the US will be very eager to hire them to pick their brains.

DON’T DOUBT THUS!😿😿🙀🙀


44 posted on 04/23/2024 3:28:07 PM PDT by House Atreides (I’m now ULTRA-MAGA-PRO-MAX)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson